The New York Times, CBS and Fox, et al - They're ALL Part of the Regime
By Scott Lazarowitz
Recently the Ludwig von Mises Institute received a visit from a New York Times reporter. Lew Rockwell politely asked him to leave, referring to the reporter as “part of the regime.”
The New York Times‘ subsequent article was mainly intended to be about Sen. Rand Paul, but really it was a hit piece on the Mises Institute and libertarianism in general.
I think that Lew Rockwell was right to correctly identify a scribbler for a long-time distributor of State press releases.
And given the Times‘ past efforts at pro-Democrat Party influence, one can suggest that this hit piece, with assertions made without facts to back them up, may have been intended with the 2016 Presidential race in mind.
But the New York Times is not only a propaganda sheet for the Democrat Party, but for the State, as we saw many years ago with the NYT‘s cover-up of Soviet genocide in the Ukraine. More recently have been theTimes‘ aiding and abetting the war on Iraq, its push for medical fascism, a.k.a. ObamaCare, and other campaigns for State expansion.
In fact, the NYT has been a “propaganda megaphone” for war. There have also been the NYT‘s collusion with the CIA and Obama Administration on the handling of Hollywood’s use of Zero Dark Thirty to promote Obama’s reelection bid, the NYT’s conspiring with Obama flunkies to justify the murder of alleged terrorist supporter Anwar al-Awlaki (after the fact), the NYT‘s unjustifiably withholding information on behalf of Bush officials and withholding stories to cover up for CIA misdeeds (yet reveals military secrets on its front page on behalf of regime parasites), and the NYT‘s propaganda for war on Iran.
Could there be any more rhetorical question than asking whether the New York Times is “part of the regime”?
But it isn’t just the New York Times. We can compare CBS’s harsh interrogation of regime critic Ron Paul to CBS’s love-fest with then-Defense Sec. Leon Panetta.
We can also look at the news media‘s criticism of Julian Assange and Wikileaks. And the media’s pro-military criticism of an actual investigative journalist as well, the late Michael Hastings, regarding his Rolling Stone article on the military’s use of psy-ops on U.S. senators and, in some cases reporters acting as Pentagon spokespeople in criticizing Hastings in his article on retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal.
But back to the New York Times, the paper of State worship and Regime deference. One of its authoritarian statist columnists, David Brooks, seems to think that Americans aren’t deferential enough to authority.
In Brooks’s differentiation between just and unjust authority he refers to Presidents Lincoln and FDR as apparently just authority.
And Brooks refers to the “Question Authority” crowd as seeing public servants as being “in it for themselves” (which they are, most of them), and that we are arrogant to question the legitimacy of the central planners of the ruling elites. Perhaps Brooks might try reading Ludwig von Mises’s Socialism and Planned Chaos, for a bit of de-programming.
And contrary to the Mises Institute’s promotion of Austrian economics, the Times‘ alleged economist, Paul Krugman promotes the Keynesian way of life that has caused America’s decline over the past century. Krugman lives by Keynesianism, which consists of policies of selfishness, irresponsibility and immediate gratification, yet he calls those who are against central planning and who believe in sound money to be of the “extreme fringe.” Go figure.
I think that Brooks and Krugman adequately reflect the statist authoritarian mindset of the Times‘ editors in general. But such promotion of statism and militarism seems to have found its way into the slanted news coverage as well.
So with the Times, and most of the other mainstream media outlets, the State and its central planners are good and decent, but those who love liberty, not so much.
One problem with many amongst the news media and the Left is a short-sightedness which really characterizes the American population in general. This is part of the society’s decline since the turn of the 20th Century and FDR’s New Deal especially, and is part of an emotionalistic idolizing of the State (and its central planning bureaucrats) as society’s replacement parents. An example of the short-sightedness is theTimes editorial board’s response to Barack Obama’s recent State of the Union address.
But this Regime-supporting authoritarianism isn’t just on the part of those on the Left. The conservatives love the State as well, hence the shallow, unthinking support for the post-9/11 war in Afghanistan, which was wrong and based on lies, and for war on Iraq, also based on lies. For some reason, statists on both sides seem to see patriotism as supporting your government even when the government’s actions are wrong. In my view, they need to grow up and try to think for themselves.
So when the State’s critics make their criticisms known, for many people it is as though someone has criticized their mom or dad, it’s deeply personal and not only do the State’s defenders run to the State’s defense but they also tend to childishly run to slander the State’s critics.
But how do the news media such as the New York Times continue to enjoy such good standing in the eyes of so many people? Why do so many of them act is sycophants for the State? As Hans-Hermann Hoppe observed,
As an anti-intellectual intellectual, one can expect bribes to be offered — and it is amazing how easily some people can be corrupted: a few hundred dollars, a nice trip, a photo-op with the mighty and powerful are all too often sufficient to make people sell out.
But as far as why mainstream media outlets continue to lie and distort information, propagandize on behalf of corrupt politicians, banksters and military leaders, many such “journalists” probably do have a gullible and naive blind faith in their leaders despite the destruction such leaders have caused.
Or perhaps the scribblers and babblers really are fearful that what happened to James Risen, James Rosen, Audrey Hudson, and Michael Hastings, among others, may also happen to them. Who knows?
But in their devotion to the State, yes, sadly many amongst the “Fourth Estate” really are just another part of the Regime.
So Lew Rockwell was right to cordially request the New York Times reporter to vamoose, to leave the premises of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, an institution obviously not friendly to the statist paradigm of the New York Times‘ beloved central planning regime.
Link:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/scott-lazarowitz/the-ny-times-cbs-fox-et-al/
Thursday, January 30, 2014
A fine mess we've gotten into...
By Andrew P. Napolitano
What if the state of the union is a mess? What if the government spies on all of us all of the time and recognizes no limits to its spying? What if its appetite for acquiring personal knowledge about all Americans is insatiable? What if the government uses the microchips in our cellphones to follow us and listen to us as we move about?
What if the Constitution expressly prohibits the government from doing this? What if the government has written laws that are interpreted in secret by judges who meet in secret and are applied by federal agents who operate in secret and their secret behavior doesn’t even resemble what the laws say they can do?
What if the feds have seized the content of every text message, email, mobile and landline telephone call, utility bill, credit card bill and bank statement of everyone in America for the past four years? What if no law has authorized them to capture this? What if when asked by members of Congress, in public and under oath, high-ranking officials, at least one with ribbons on his chest and stars on his shoulders, lied about what the government is doing?
What if the government’s spies have so insinuated themselves into our computers that they can capture every keystroke we press on all of our computers before we hit “send”? What if the feds have hacked into the servers of every major computer service provider in the country and they know what we have typed before we even make corrections? What if the feds have a copy of what we have deleted? What if our typed innermost thoughts and even second thoughts that were never sent in emails nevertheless reside in the government’s databank?
What if the president knows all this and supports what his spies are doing? What if he secretly authorized all this, but only admitted to some of it when he got caught? What if he uses his spies to tell him what he wants to know about those who oppose him?
What if the president sold Congress and the country a Trojan horse called Obamacare? What if he promised that under Obamacare you could keep the health insurance you had before Obamacare, and he lied and he knew it? What if he promised that under Obamacare you could keep the same physicians who treated you before Obamacare, and he lied and he knew it?
What if Obamacare made insurance coverage so expensive that some people lost their jobs because their employers could not afford to pay for it? What if under Obamacare more than six million Americans lost their insurance coverage overnight and most haven’t gotten it back yet? What if this was the president’s plan all along so that he could orchestrate a government takeover of the health insurance industry?
What if the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the president one night that our consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was under attack by organized al-Qaida troops while the attack was taking place? What if the president did nothing about it? What if the president knew the truth about the Benghazi attack, but for three weeks claimed that the attack was just an out-of-control political demonstration by fanatics who were upset about a cheap 15-minute low-grade Hollywood movie that never made it into theaters?
What if our ambassador to Libya died in that attack and the president covered up the facts surrounding his death? What if the president dispatched our U.N. ambassador to all major TV networks to hide the truth? What if he tried to promote the lying U.N. ambassador to secretary of state?
What if, in five years, the president has borrowed more than $6 trillion and spent it all on his favorite industries and risky bailouts and fruitless wars, and now has nothing to show for it but the debts that will one day come due? What if the government claims the unemployment rate is 6.7 percent but so many people have stopped looking for jobs that it is really 10.2 percent?
What if the president alone has increased the number of people on food stamps and increased the amount of money they each receive? What if half of the adults in the nation are now receiving material assistance from the government in the form of money the government has borrowed? What if generations of Americans as yet unborn will be obliged to pay back the money the president has borrowed and given away?
What if nearly two-thirds of Americans simply don’t trust the president’s judgment? What if the president alone raised the minimum wage to be paid to workers on federal projects? What if the president has threatened to use his pen and his phone to operate the government in ways the Constitution forbids? What if the Constitution makes clear and the courts have underscored the truism that the president cannot modify or amend or postpone the effective dates of federal laws? What if the president has modified and amended and postponed federal laws so as to help his friends and wound his foes?
What if the president has tried to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for contraceptive services that they cannot use and that are prohibited by the Roman Catholic Church? What if the Sisters sued the president and asked the court to relieve them of the burden of paying for contraception? What if the president resisted the Sisters’ lawsuit and questioned the sincerity of their religious beliefs? What if the Supreme Court stopped the president from forcing the nuns to pay for contraception before it even heard their case?
What if the president has discussed none of this in his State of the Union address? What if the president believes that during his second term in office he answers to no one? What if the president lives and works surrounded by those who reinforce his beliefs? What if he has rejected his oath of fidelity to the Constitution? What will he do next? What will we do about it?
Link:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/andrew-p-napolitano/the-state-of-the-authoritarian-union/
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
King Obama...
Written by Alex Newman
Following Obama’s radical State of the Union threats to bypass Congress and impose his unconstitutional agenda on America by decree, more than a few lawmakers in both chambers have expressed outrage and announced efforts to rein in the administration. Among other comments, Republican congressmen and senators said the “lawless” and “imperial presidency” of Obama must be restrained. Other legislators said the president was behaving like a “king” or even a “socialistic dictator” — and that the pledge to violate his oath of office and rule by decree needed to be urgently addressed.
A CNN poll after the speech revealed that more than two thirds of viewers opposed Obama advancing his extreme plots on everything from “global warming” to gun control by executive fiat. Liberty-minded Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, vowed to rein in the lawless plans if possible. In the wake of non-stop mega-scandals, public support for impeachment has been surging, too. Democrats in Congress, however, consistently and bizarrely applauded the president’s dangerous vow to bypass the legislative branch of government in his zeal to “fundamentally transform” America, as Obama once put it.
“America does not stand still — and neither will I,” Obama threatened during his January 28 State of the Union address. “So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.” Based on the rest of his speech, by “expand opportunity,” the president was clearly referring to expanding anti-constitutional government and his own usurped power. Americans were not amused, though, and neither were many of their elected representatives in Congress who would be made redundant under Obama’s “executive action” schemes.
Liberty-minded and conservative Republicans in both houses of Congress — as opposed to members of the establishment wing of the GOP accused of enabling the lawlessness — were at the forefront lambasting the president’s myriad threats. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, for example, threatened a lawsuit by lawmakers against the administration’s machinations. “He may think he’s king, he may declare he’s a king, but that’s not what he is under the Constitution,” she explained. “We’ll sue the president of the United States and force him to no longer act unilaterally.” Efforts are already underway to restrain the administration, she said.
A coalition of at least 74 representatives so far has also introduced a resolution to “Stop This Overreaching Presidency” (STOP) that would bring legal action against Obama for unconstitutional executive orders. “It is sad that we must take this step for the President to follow his Constitutional duty but given yesterday's speech it is clear the President does not respect the balance of power our Founders intended,” said Rep. Ted Yoho (R-Fla.). “Sorry Mr. President, but the Constitution trumps both your pen and phone.”
Rep. Randy Weber of Texas, meanwhile, sent out a message blasting the president as a lying “Socialistic dictator” shortly before “Kommandant-In-Chief” Obama began issuing his extreme threats to rule over America unilaterally. In a series of State of the Union twitter posts, Weber, who represents former Congressman Ron Paul’s district, also slammed Obama over everything from the Benghazi scandal and trashing the United States to his “phone and pen” scheming.
Another prominent Texas Republican, Rep. Steve Stockman, walked out during Obama’s speech, noting that the president’s abuse of executive orders to legislate without Congress was unconstitutional. “I could not bear to watch as he continued to cross the clearly-defined boundaries of the Constitutional separation of powers,” Stockman said, noting that Obama still refuses to admit that his policies have failed. Indeed, the president’s agenda of higher taxes and spending represent a “blueprint for perpetual poverty,” he said.
“Even worse, Obama has openly vowed to break his oath of office and begin enacting his own brand of law through executive decree,” continued Stockman, who has publicly suggested that there was already enough support in the House of Representatives to impeach Obama for numerous crimes. “This is a wholesale violation of his oath of office and a disqualifying offense.” Stockman has also called for a special prosecutor to investigate.
After the speech, Rep. Steve King of Iowa noted that it was the job of Congress to pass laws, and that Obama knows that full-well. “This threat that the president is going to run the government with an ink pen and executive orders, we’ve never had a president with that level of audacity and that level of contempt for his own oath of office,” the congressman explained about the administration’s lawless threats to bypass lawmakers. “We need to take our oath seriously and defend the Constitution.”
Rep. Raúl Labrador of Idaho, responding to the outrageous schemes to make Congress irrelevant, blasted the machinations in a press release as well. “Unfortunately, what I heard from President Obama tonight was hostility toward our foundational principles, condescension toward a co-equal branch of government, and a general aversion to common sense and bipartisanship,” he said. Rep. Gregg Harper of Mississippi, meanwhile, said Obama had attempted to “intimidate Congress by abusing executive power.”
In the Senate, multiple liberty-minded senators also expressed outrage over Obama’s plans to essentially rule America by decree. Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, who offered a response for the Tea Party, pointed out that the real inequality plaguing America is the result of government — “every time it takes rights and opportunities away from the American people and gives them instead to politicians, bureaucrats and special interests.”
However, Lee also acknowledged that Obama and his party were not the only guilty ones. “The Republican establishment in Washington can be just as out-of-touch as the Democratic Establishment,” he said. “I believe we need to do what Americans have always done — come together and press for positive change. Protesting against dysfunctional government is a great American tradition, going back to the original tea party in Boston, about 240 years ago.”
Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, widely considered among the frontrunners for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, released a stinging rebuke of Obama’s threats in a widely celebrated 10-minute video. “President Obama and the Washington elite are driving our great nation right into the ground,” he said, adding that many Republicans were contributing to the problem. “From ignoring the Constitution to drowning our children and grandchildren in unbearable debt, President Obama and Washington politicians on both sides of the aisle are destroying everything that America stands for.”
Another popular senator who has earned broad respect for his efforts to rein in lawless government, Ted Cruz of Texas, also had harsh words for the Obama administration. “Of all the troubling aspects of the Obama presidency, none is more dangerous than the president's persistent pattern of lawlessness, his willingness to disregard the written law and instead enforce his own policies via executive fiat,” Sen. Cruz wrote in the Wall Street Journal. “The president's taste for unilateral action to circumvent Congress should concern every citizen, regardless of party or ideology.”
Despite sharp rhetoric by the growing cadre of liberty-minded lawmakers, however, conservative leaders are warning that serious action is required if the U.S. Constitution, liberty, the rule of law, and self-government are to survive the relentless and accelerating wave of assaults. “In the past, there were some analysts willing to complain that Congress had become a rubber stamp,” explained Jack McManus, president of the constitutionalist John Birch Society. “Today, the occupants of Capitol Hill have become a doormat. To conclude that there’s a great need for angry Americans willing to stop the juggernaut leading to total government is to accurately assess our nation’s plight.”
With Tea Party groups, libertarians, Republicans, and a growing number of Americans across the political spectrum becoming increasingly alarmed at the Obama administration’s push for unilateral autocratic rule, it remains to be seen whether enough lawmakers to make a difference are ready to act. At this point, though, Congress and state governments have an obligation to restrain a federal government that two thirds of Americans say is “out of control” and threatens their basic liberties. Absent a drastic change in course, the fundamental transformation of America promised by Obama will accelerate — destroying what remains of the Constitution and the economy in its wake. That should not be an option.
Link:
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/17507-lawmakers-furious-after-socialistic-dictator-obamas-address
Are you ready???
If 3 Inches Of Snow Can Cause This Much Chaos In Atlanta, What Will Economic Collapse Look Like?
Michael Snyder
This week, three inches of snow “paralyzed” the ninth-largest city in the United States, and the highways of Atlanta “resembled a scene in a post-apocalyptic world” according to national news reports. Hundreds of cars were abandoned on the side of the road, people were spending the night in churches and grocery stores, and many walked for hours in a desperate attempt to get home or find needed provisions.
So if three inches of snow can cause this much chaos in one of our major cities, what will a full-blown economic collapse look like? Most Americans have no idea how fragile our way of life is. In the event of a major natural disaster, a massive EMP blast or a complete economic meltdown, our lives would change very rapidly, and most people are totally unprepared for that.
In Atlanta, a relatively minor snowfall has resulted in the deaths of 5 people, more than 100 injuries, and some commuters reported being stuck in traffic for up to 18 hours. According to USA Today, highways around Atlanta resembled “a post-apocalyptic world” at the height of the storm…
The usually bustling roadways in the Atlanta metropolitan area resembled a scene in a post-apocalyptic world during and after Tuesday’s snow and ice storm.
Cars abandoned at odd angles on side streets, thoroughfares and major interstates. People in this car-dependent city walked for miles, hunched over and huddled from the cold. Many had no coats, hats or gloves.
“It was a like a scene from The Walking Dead,” said Maura Neill, 38, referring to the television series about a post-apocalyptic world overtaken by zombies.
Once our normal routines are disrupted, it is amazing how rapidly people start thinking about supplies of food and water. Just check out this report from CNN…
“I’m eight months’ pregnant and have my 3-year-old with me,” Atlanta-area resident Katie Norman Horne said on SnowedOutAtlanta, a Facebook page set up to help stranded motorists.
“We’ve been in the car for over 12 hours. We are fine on gas but is anyone near on the road and might happen to have any food or some water?”
In Atlanta, 940 accidents were confirmed, with more than 100 of them involving injuries, the Georgia public safety commissioner said.
In Alabama, at least five people died Tuesday in weather-related traffic accidents. The governor deployed 350 National Guard troops to help motorists.
And because thousands upon thousands of commuters simply could not get home, many of them started seeking shelter wherever they could find it…
Students camped out with teachers in school gyms or on buses and commuters abandoned cars along the highway to seek shelter in churches, fire stations — even grocery stores — after a rare snowstorm left thousands of unaccustomed Southerners frozen in their tracks.
You can see some incredible pictures from the “snowpocalypse” in Atlanta right here.
Remember, this was just a temporary “emergency” caused by just three inches of snow that everyone knew would soon pass.
So how will people respond when a real crisis strikes that is not temporary?
We live at a time when we tend to think that we are invulnerable because of our technology.
But that simply is not true.
For example, just because this winter was a bit colder than expected, it has created a shortage of propane heating fuel in more than 30 states…
The governor of Iowa, Terry Branstad, has called on President Barack Obama to act as bitter winter weather caused a shortage of propane heating fuel and a massive spike in prices in some of the coldest regions of the US.
Propane is used by more than 12m households across the country, according industry statistics, and its shortage has led to a state of emergency being declared in more than 30 states. Prices are up more than 17% from a year ago, according to the US Energy Information Administration.
Ahead of the president’s State of the Union speech, Branstad has written to Obama expressing his concern about a crisis now sweeping the midwest: “Prices in some midwest locations have now exceeded $5 per gallon. Such prices are unsustainable for families, farmers and businesses,” he wrote.
So what would happen if a real crisis happened?
For instance, what would happen if something caused the trucks in America to stop running?
What would life look like?
Well, according to a report put out by the American Trucker Associations entitled “When Trucks Stop, America Stops“, life would get “apocalyptic” quite rapidly…
A Timeline Showing the Deterioration of Major Industries Following a Truck Stoppage
The first 24 hours
• Delivery of medical supplies to the affected area will cease.
• Hospitals will run out of basic supplies such as syringes and catheters within hours. Radiopharmaceuticals will deteriorate and become unusable.
• Service stations will begin to run out of fuel.
• Manufacturers using just-in-time manufacturing will develop component shortages.
• U.S. mail and other package delivery will cease.
Within one day
• Food shortages will begin to develop.
• Automobile fuel availability and delivery will dwindle, leading to skyrocketing prices and long lines at the gas pumps.
• Without manufacturing components and trucks for product delivery,
assembly lines will shut down, putting thousands out of work.
Within two to three days
• Food shortages will escalate, especially in the face of hoarding and consumer panic.
• Supplies of essentials—such as bottled water, powdered milk, and
canned meat—at major retailers will disappear.
• ATMs will run out of cash and banks will be unable to process
transactions.
• Service stations will completely run out of fuel for autos and trucks.
• Garbage will start piling up in urban and suburban areas.
• Container ships will sit idle in ports and rail transport will be disrupted, eventually coming to a standstill.
Within a week
• Automobile travel will cease due to the lack of fuel. Without autos and busses, many people will not be able to get to work, shop for groceries, or access medical care.
• Hospitals will begin to exhaust oxygen supplies.
Within two weeks
• The nation’s clean water supply will begin to run dry.
Within four weeks
• The nation will exhaust its clean water supply and water will be safe for drinking only after boiling. As a result gastrointestinal illnesses will increase, further taxing an already weakened health care system.
This timeline presents only the primary effects of a freeze on truck travel. Secondary effects must be considered as well, such as inability to maintain telecommunications service, reduced law enforcement, increased crime, increased illness and injury, higher death rates, and likely, civil unrest.
Sadly, most Americans have made absolutely no preparations for a major crisis of that magnitude.
They just have complete and total faith that the system will always be able to take care of them.
Someday when we do experience a great national crisis, those people will be totally blindsided by it.
Link:
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/if-3-inches-of-snow-can-cause-this-much-chaos-in-atlanta-what-will-economic-collapse-look-like
Michael Snyder
This week, three inches of snow “paralyzed” the ninth-largest city in the United States, and the highways of Atlanta “resembled a scene in a post-apocalyptic world” according to national news reports. Hundreds of cars were abandoned on the side of the road, people were spending the night in churches and grocery stores, and many walked for hours in a desperate attempt to get home or find needed provisions.
So if three inches of snow can cause this much chaos in one of our major cities, what will a full-blown economic collapse look like? Most Americans have no idea how fragile our way of life is. In the event of a major natural disaster, a massive EMP blast or a complete economic meltdown, our lives would change very rapidly, and most people are totally unprepared for that.
In Atlanta, a relatively minor snowfall has resulted in the deaths of 5 people, more than 100 injuries, and some commuters reported being stuck in traffic for up to 18 hours. According to USA Today, highways around Atlanta resembled “a post-apocalyptic world” at the height of the storm…
The usually bustling roadways in the Atlanta metropolitan area resembled a scene in a post-apocalyptic world during and after Tuesday’s snow and ice storm.
Cars abandoned at odd angles on side streets, thoroughfares and major interstates. People in this car-dependent city walked for miles, hunched over and huddled from the cold. Many had no coats, hats or gloves.
“It was a like a scene from The Walking Dead,” said Maura Neill, 38, referring to the television series about a post-apocalyptic world overtaken by zombies.
Once our normal routines are disrupted, it is amazing how rapidly people start thinking about supplies of food and water. Just check out this report from CNN…
“I’m eight months’ pregnant and have my 3-year-old with me,” Atlanta-area resident Katie Norman Horne said on SnowedOutAtlanta, a Facebook page set up to help stranded motorists.
“We’ve been in the car for over 12 hours. We are fine on gas but is anyone near on the road and might happen to have any food or some water?”
In Atlanta, 940 accidents were confirmed, with more than 100 of them involving injuries, the Georgia public safety commissioner said.
In Alabama, at least five people died Tuesday in weather-related traffic accidents. The governor deployed 350 National Guard troops to help motorists.
And because thousands upon thousands of commuters simply could not get home, many of them started seeking shelter wherever they could find it…
Students camped out with teachers in school gyms or on buses and commuters abandoned cars along the highway to seek shelter in churches, fire stations — even grocery stores — after a rare snowstorm left thousands of unaccustomed Southerners frozen in their tracks.
You can see some incredible pictures from the “snowpocalypse” in Atlanta right here.
Remember, this was just a temporary “emergency” caused by just three inches of snow that everyone knew would soon pass.
So how will people respond when a real crisis strikes that is not temporary?
We live at a time when we tend to think that we are invulnerable because of our technology.
But that simply is not true.
For example, just because this winter was a bit colder than expected, it has created a shortage of propane heating fuel in more than 30 states…
The governor of Iowa, Terry Branstad, has called on President Barack Obama to act as bitter winter weather caused a shortage of propane heating fuel and a massive spike in prices in some of the coldest regions of the US.
Propane is used by more than 12m households across the country, according industry statistics, and its shortage has led to a state of emergency being declared in more than 30 states. Prices are up more than 17% from a year ago, according to the US Energy Information Administration.
Ahead of the president’s State of the Union speech, Branstad has written to Obama expressing his concern about a crisis now sweeping the midwest: “Prices in some midwest locations have now exceeded $5 per gallon. Such prices are unsustainable for families, farmers and businesses,” he wrote.
So what would happen if a real crisis happened?
For instance, what would happen if something caused the trucks in America to stop running?
What would life look like?
Well, according to a report put out by the American Trucker Associations entitled “When Trucks Stop, America Stops“, life would get “apocalyptic” quite rapidly…
A Timeline Showing the Deterioration of Major Industries Following a Truck Stoppage
The first 24 hours
• Delivery of medical supplies to the affected area will cease.
• Hospitals will run out of basic supplies such as syringes and catheters within hours. Radiopharmaceuticals will deteriorate and become unusable.
• Service stations will begin to run out of fuel.
• Manufacturers using just-in-time manufacturing will develop component shortages.
• U.S. mail and other package delivery will cease.
Within one day
• Food shortages will begin to develop.
• Automobile fuel availability and delivery will dwindle, leading to skyrocketing prices and long lines at the gas pumps.
• Without manufacturing components and trucks for product delivery,
assembly lines will shut down, putting thousands out of work.
Within two to three days
• Food shortages will escalate, especially in the face of hoarding and consumer panic.
• Supplies of essentials—such as bottled water, powdered milk, and
canned meat—at major retailers will disappear.
• ATMs will run out of cash and banks will be unable to process
transactions.
• Service stations will completely run out of fuel for autos and trucks.
• Garbage will start piling up in urban and suburban areas.
• Container ships will sit idle in ports and rail transport will be disrupted, eventually coming to a standstill.
Within a week
• Automobile travel will cease due to the lack of fuel. Without autos and busses, many people will not be able to get to work, shop for groceries, or access medical care.
• Hospitals will begin to exhaust oxygen supplies.
Within two weeks
• The nation’s clean water supply will begin to run dry.
Within four weeks
• The nation will exhaust its clean water supply and water will be safe for drinking only after boiling. As a result gastrointestinal illnesses will increase, further taxing an already weakened health care system.
This timeline presents only the primary effects of a freeze on truck travel. Secondary effects must be considered as well, such as inability to maintain telecommunications service, reduced law enforcement, increased crime, increased illness and injury, higher death rates, and likely, civil unrest.
Sadly, most Americans have made absolutely no preparations for a major crisis of that magnitude.
They just have complete and total faith that the system will always be able to take care of them.
Someday when we do experience a great national crisis, those people will be totally blindsided by it.
Link:
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/if-3-inches-of-snow-can-cause-this-much-chaos-in-atlanta-what-will-economic-collapse-look-like
OOPS!!! Ya think???
By Garth Paltridge
Global temperatures have not risen for 17 years. The pause now threatens to expose how much scientists sold their souls for cash and fame, warns emeritus professor Garth Paltridge, former chief research scientist with the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research.
Climate Change’s Inherent Uncertainties
…there has been no significant warming over the most recent fifteen or so years…
In the light of all this, we have at least to consider the possibility that the scientific establishment behind the global warming issue has been drawn into the trap of seriously overstating the climate problem … in its effort to promote the cause. It is a particularly nasty trap in the context of science, because it risks destroying, perhaps for centuries to come, the unique and hard-won reputation for honesty which is the basis of society’s respect for scientific endeavour…
The trap was set in the late 1970s or thereabouts when the environmental movement first realised that doing something about global warming would play to quite a number of its social agendas. At much the same time, it became accepted wisdom around the corridors of power that government-funded scientists (that is, most scientists) should be required to obtain a goodly fraction of their funds and salaries from external sources—external anyway to their own particular organisation.
The scientists in environmental research laboratories, since they are not normally linked to any particular private industry, were forced to seek funds from other government departments. In turn this forced them to accept the need for advocacy and for the manipulation of public opinion. For that sort of activity, an arm’s-length association with the environmental movement would be a union made in heaven…
The trap was partially sprung in climate research when a number of the relevant scientists began to enjoy the advocacy business. The enjoyment was based on a considerable increase in funding and employment opportunity. The increase was not so much on the hard-science side of things but rather in the emerging fringe institutes and organisations devoted, at least in part, to selling the message of climatic doom. A new and rewarding research lifestyle emerged which involved the giving of advice to all types and levels of government, the broadcasting of unchallengeable opinion to the general public, and easy justification for attendance at international conferences—this last in some luxury by normal scientific experience, and at a frequency previously unheard of…
The trap was fully sprung when many of the world’s major national academies of science (such as the … Australian Academy of Science) persuaded themselves to issue reports giving support to the conclusions of the IPCC. The reports were touted as national assessments that were supposedly independent of the IPCC and of each other, but of necessity were compiled with the assistance of, and in some cases at the behest of, many of the scientists involved in the IPCC international machinations. In effect, the academies, which are the most prestigious of the institutions of science, formally nailed their colours to the mast of the politically correct.
Since that time three or four years ago, there has been no comfortable way for the scientific community to raise the spectre of serious uncertainty about the forecasts of climatic disaster… It can no longer escape prime responsibility if it should turn out in the end that doing something in the name of mitigation of global warming is the costliest scientific mistake ever visited on humanity.
Link:
http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2014/01-02/fundamental-uncertainties-climate-change/
Why is your hair gray???
What your gray hair may be telling you
by: Carolanne Wright
When Ann Wigmore was in her 50s, she was riddled with health issues and had a full head of gray hair. She then began a life-changing journey of living foods, which included green smoothies and ample shots of wheatgrass. Before long, she regained her health along with a fresh glow. Interestingly, her hair returned to its youthful color as well. Considering the condition of the hair reflects nutritional status and overall vitality, Ann Wigmore's dramatic transformation isn't surprising. In light of this, it's important to keep in mind that premature graying hair is much more than a cosmetic concern, it can indicate serious nutritional deficiencies and foreshadow a future of disease.
The root issue behind gray hair - and what to do about it
Scientists have isolated the cause for gray hair, namely, melanin pigment producing stem cells located at each follicle. Depending on our genetic disposition, these cells begin to produce less pigment as we age, which eventually results in gray hair.
Be that as it may, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and Ayurveda, the time-honored medical system of India, believe the reasons for gray hair extend far beyond simple genetic heritage. According to TCM, the quality of blood and the health of the kidneys are reflected in the strength, color and condition of hair. Foods that fortify the blood and kidneys include chlorophyll, blackstrap molasses, black sesame seeds, hijiki seaweed, nettles and, Ann Wigmore's favorite, wheatgrass. TCM recommends the avoidance of excessive dairy, meat and salt.
In Ayurvedic thought, graying hair is related to an underlying disturbance with the pitta and vata body constitutions. Pitta is your typical Type A personality - active, fiery and driven, while vata is quick and light with a tendency towards nervousness. Reduction of stress is important for balancing both. Exercise, yoga, deep breathing, massage, acupuncture and meditation are all beneficial. Amla, a popular Ayurvedic herb, is also recommended as it slows down aging.
Furthermore, premature gray hair can indicate thyroid disorders like Grave's disease, Hashimoto's disease, hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism. Vitamin B5, B6 and B12 deficiencies, as well as iron anemia, are also common. These vitamin and mineral problems are often linked with malabsorption issues stemming from Crohn's disease, celiac disease, intestinal bacterial overgrowth or fish tapeworms. Lack of adequate vitamin A, zinc and copper are troublesome too and can lead to poor immunity, weakened blood vessel integrity and, in some cases, stroke and cardiovascular disease.
Ann Wigmore seemed to intuitively sense the value in reversing health issues and the aging process through living foods and nutrient dense green drinks. Unknowingly in agreement with the principles governing TCM and Ayurveda, she embraced a diet teeming with A and B vitamins, minerals and plant-based protein, effectively healing disease and defending against future problems - all with a glossy, full head of hair to boot.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/043684_grey_hair_aging_TCM.html#ixzz2rnj9hoHd
by: Carolanne Wright
When Ann Wigmore was in her 50s, she was riddled with health issues and had a full head of gray hair. She then began a life-changing journey of living foods, which included green smoothies and ample shots of wheatgrass. Before long, she regained her health along with a fresh glow. Interestingly, her hair returned to its youthful color as well. Considering the condition of the hair reflects nutritional status and overall vitality, Ann Wigmore's dramatic transformation isn't surprising. In light of this, it's important to keep in mind that premature graying hair is much more than a cosmetic concern, it can indicate serious nutritional deficiencies and foreshadow a future of disease.
The root issue behind gray hair - and what to do about it
Scientists have isolated the cause for gray hair, namely, melanin pigment producing stem cells located at each follicle. Depending on our genetic disposition, these cells begin to produce less pigment as we age, which eventually results in gray hair.
Be that as it may, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and Ayurveda, the time-honored medical system of India, believe the reasons for gray hair extend far beyond simple genetic heritage. According to TCM, the quality of blood and the health of the kidneys are reflected in the strength, color and condition of hair. Foods that fortify the blood and kidneys include chlorophyll, blackstrap molasses, black sesame seeds, hijiki seaweed, nettles and, Ann Wigmore's favorite, wheatgrass. TCM recommends the avoidance of excessive dairy, meat and salt.
In Ayurvedic thought, graying hair is related to an underlying disturbance with the pitta and vata body constitutions. Pitta is your typical Type A personality - active, fiery and driven, while vata is quick and light with a tendency towards nervousness. Reduction of stress is important for balancing both. Exercise, yoga, deep breathing, massage, acupuncture and meditation are all beneficial. Amla, a popular Ayurvedic herb, is also recommended as it slows down aging.
Furthermore, premature gray hair can indicate thyroid disorders like Grave's disease, Hashimoto's disease, hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism. Vitamin B5, B6 and B12 deficiencies, as well as iron anemia, are also common. These vitamin and mineral problems are often linked with malabsorption issues stemming from Crohn's disease, celiac disease, intestinal bacterial overgrowth or fish tapeworms. Lack of adequate vitamin A, zinc and copper are troublesome too and can lead to poor immunity, weakened blood vessel integrity and, in some cases, stroke and cardiovascular disease.
Ann Wigmore seemed to intuitively sense the value in reversing health issues and the aging process through living foods and nutrient dense green drinks. Unknowingly in agreement with the principles governing TCM and Ayurveda, she embraced a diet teeming with A and B vitamins, minerals and plant-based protein, effectively healing disease and defending against future problems - all with a glossy, full head of hair to boot.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/043684_grey_hair_aging_TCM.html#ixzz2rnj9hoHd
Why are bankers killing themselves???
Michael Snyder
Bankers committing suicide by jumping from the rooftops of their own banks is something that we think of when we think of the Great Depression. Well, it just happened in London, England. A vice president at JPMorgan's European headquarters in London plunged to his death after jumping from the top of the 33rd floor. He fell more than 500 feet, and it is being reported by an eyewitness that "there was quite a lot of blood". This comes on the heels of news that a former Deutsche Bank executive was found hanged in his home in London on Sunday. So why is this happening? Yes, the markets have gone down a little bit recently but they certainly have not crashed yet. Could there be more to these deaths than meets the eye? You never know. And as I will discuss below, there have been a lot of other really strange things happening around the world lately as well.
But before we get to any of that, let's take a closer look at some of these banker deaths. The JPMorgan executive that jumped to his death on Tuesday was named Gabriel Magee. He was 39 years old, and his suicide has the city of London in shock...
A bank executive who died after jumping 500ft from the top of JP Morgan's European headquarters in London this morning has been named as Gabriel Magee.
The American senior manager, 39, fell from the 33-story skyscraper and was found on the ninth floor roof, which surrounds the Canary Wharf skyscraper.
He was a vice president in the corporate and investment bank technology department having joined in 2004, moving to Britain from the United States in 2007.
What would cause a man in his prime working years who is making huge amounts of money to do something like that?
The death on Sunday of former Deutsche Bank executive Bill Broeksmit is also a mystery. According to the Daily Mail, police consider his death to be "non-suspicious", which means that they believe that it was a suicide and not a murder...
A former Deutsche Bank executive has been found dead at a house in London, it emerged today.
The body of William ‘Bill’ Broeksmit, 58, was discovered at his home in South Kensington on Sunday shortly after midday by police, who had been called to reports of a man found hanging at a house.
Mr Broeksmit - who retired last February - was a former senior manager with close ties to co-chief executive Anshu Jain. Metropolitan Police officers said his death was declared as non-suspicious.
On top of that, Business Insider is reporting that a communications director at another bank in London was found dead last week...
Last week, a U.K.-based communications director at Swiss Re AG died last week. The cause of death has not been made public.
Perhaps it is just a coincidence that these deaths have all come so close to one another. After all, people die all the time.
And London is rather dreary this time of the year. It is easy for people to get depressed if they are not accustomed to endless gloomy weather.
If the stock market was already crashing, it would be easy to blame the suicides on that. The world certainly remembers what happened during the crash of 1929...
Historically, bankers have been stereotyped as the most likely to commit suicide. This has a lot to do with the famous 1929 stock market crash, which resulted in 1,616 banks failing and more than 20,000 businesses going bankrupt. The number of bankers committing suicide directly after the crash is thought to have been only around 20, with another 100 people connected to the financial industry dying at their own hand within the year.
But the market isn't crashing just yet. We definitely appear to be at a "turning point", but things are still at least somewhat stable.
So why are bankers killing themselves?
That is a good question.
As I mentioned above, there have also been quite a few other strange things that have happened lately that seem to be "out of place".
For example, Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report posted the following cryptic message on Twitter the other day...
"Have an exit plan..."
What in the world does he mean by that?
Maybe that is just a case of Drudge being Drudge.
Then again, maybe not.
And on Tuesday we learned that a prominent Russian Bank has banned all cash withdrawals until next week...
Bloomberg reports that 'My Bank' - one of Russia's top 200 lenders by assets - has introduced a complete ban on cash withdrawals until next week. While the Ruble has been losing ground rapidly recently, we suspect few have been expecting bank runs in Russia.
Yes, we have heard some reports of people having difficulty getting money out of their banks around the world lately, but this news out of Russia really surprised me.
Yet another story that seemed rather odd was a report in the Wall Street Journal earlier this week that stated that Germany's central bank is advocating "a one-time wealth tax" for European nations that need a bailout...
Germany's central bank Monday proposed a one-time wealth tax as an option for euro-zone countries facing bankruptcy, reviving a idea that has circled for years in Europe but has so far gained little traction.
Why would they be suggesting such a thing if "economic recovery" was just around the corner?
According to that same article, the IMF has recommended a similar thing...
The International Monetary Fund in October also floated the idea of a one-time "capital levy," amid a sharp deterioration of public finances in many countries. A 10% tax would bring the debt levels of a sample of 15 euro-zone member countries back to pre-crisis levels of 2007, the IMF said.
So what does all of this mean?
I am not exactly sure, but I have got a bad feeling about this - especially considering the financial chaos that we are witnessing in emerging markets all over the globe right now.
So what do you think? Please feel free to share your thoughts by posting a comment below...
Link:
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/why-are-banking-executives-in-london-killing-themselves
"Economic development has always been about acquiring the capital, technology, business knowledge, and trained workforce to make valuable things that can be sold at home and abroad. US capital and technology are being located abroad, and the trained domestic workforce is disappearing from disuse and abandonment. The US is falling out of the ranks of the industrialized countries and is on the path to becoming an undeveloped economy."
How Junk Economists Help The Rich Impoverish The Working Class
Paul Craig Roberts
Last week, I explained how economists and policymakers destroyed our economy for the sake of short-term corporate profits from jobs offshoring and financial deregulation.
That same week Business Week published an article, “Factory Jobs Are Gone. Get Over It,” by Charles Kenny. Kenny expresses the view of establishment economists, such as Brookings Institute economist Justin Wolfers who wants to know “What’s with the political fetish for manufacturing? Are factories really so awesome?”
“Not really,” Kenny says. Citing Eric Fisher of the Cleveland Federal Reserve Bank, Kenny reports that wages rise most rapidly in those states that most quickly abandon manufacturing. Kenny cites Gary Hufbauer, once an academic colleague of mine now at the Peterson Institute, who claims that the 2009 tariffs applied to Chinese tire imports cost US consumers $1 billion in higher prices and 3,731 lost retail jobs. Note the precision of the jobs loss, right down to the last 31.
In support of the argument that Americans are better off without manufacturing jobs, Kenny cites MIT and Harvard academic economists to the effect that there is no evidence that manufacturing tends to cluster, thus disputing the view that there are economies from manufacturers tending to congregate in the same areas where they benefit from an experienced work force and established supply chains.
Perhaps the MIT and Harvard economists did their study after US manufacturing centers became shells of their former selves and Detroit lost 25% of its population, Gary Indiana lost 22% of its population, Flint Michigan lost 18% of its population, Cleveland lost 17% of its population, and St Louis lost 20% of its population. If the economists’ studies were done after manufacturing had departed, they would not find manufacturing concentrated in locations where it formerly flourished. MIT and Harvard economists might find this an idea too large to comprehend.
Kenny’s answer to the displaced manufacturing workers is–you guessed it–jobs training. He cites MIT economist David Autor who thinks the problem is the federal government only spends $1 on retraining for every $400 that it spends on supporting displaced workers.
These arguments are so absurd as to be mindless. Let’s examine them. What jobs are the displaced manufacturing workers to be trained for? Why, service jobs, of course. Kenny actually thinks that “service industries–hotels, hospitals, media, and accounting–have taken up the slack.” (I don’t know where he gets media and accounting from; scant sign of such jobs are found in the payroll jobs reports.) Moreover, service jobs have certainly not taken up the slack as the rising rate of long-term unemployment and declining labor force participation rate prove.
Nontradable service sector jobs such as hotel maids, hospital orderlies, retail clerks, waitresses and bartenders are low productivity, low value-added jobs that cannot pay incomes comparable to manufacturing jobs. The long term decline in real median family income relates to the movement offshore of manufacturing jobs and tradable professional service jobs, such as software engineering, IT, research and design.
Moreover, domestic service jobs do not produce exportable goods and services. A country without manufactures has little with which to earn foreign exchange in order to pay for its imports of its shoes, clothing, manufactured goods, high-technology products, Apple computers, and increasingly food. Therefore, that country’s trade deficit widens as each year it owes more and more to foreigners.
A country whose best known products are fraudulent and toxic financial instruments and GMO foods that no one wants cannot pay for its imports except by signing over its existing assets. The foreigners buy up US assets with their trade surpluses. Consequently, income from rents, interest, dividends, capital gains, and profits leave US pockets for foreign pockets. It is a safe bet that Hufbauer did not include any of these costs, or maybe even the loss of US tire workers’ wages and tire manufacturers’ profits, when he concluded that trying to save US tire manufacturing jobs cost more than it was worth.
Eric Fisher’s argument that the highest wage growth is found in areas where higher productivity manufacturing jobs are most rapidly replaced with lower productivity domestic service jobs is beyond absurd. (Possibly Fisher did not say this; I’m taking Kenny’s word for it.) It has always been a foundation of labor economics that workers are paid the value of their contribution to output. Manufacturing employees working with technology embodied in plant and equipment produce more value per man hour than maids changing sheets and bartenders mixing drinks.
In my book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism And Economic Dissolution Of The West (2013), I point out the obvious mistakes in “studies” by Matthew Slaughter, a former member of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors, and Harvard professor Michael Porter. These academic economists conclude on the basis of extraordinary errors and ignorance of empirical facts, that jobs offshoring is good for Americans. They were able to reach this conclusion despite the absence of any visibility of this good, and they hold to this absurd conclusion despite the inability of a “recovery” (or lack of one) that is 4.5 years old to get off the ground and get employment back up to where it was six years ago. They hold to their “education is the answer” solution despite the growing percentage of university graduates who cannot find employment.
Michael Hudson is certainly correct to call economists purveyors of “junk economics.” Indeed, I wonder if economists even have junk value. But they are well paid by Wall Street and the offshoring corporations.
What the Brookings Institute’s Justin Wolfers needs to ask himself is: what is the redefinition of economic development? For my lifetime the definition of a developed economy is an industrialized economy. It has always been “the industrialized countries” that occupy the status of “developed economies,” contrasted with “undeveloped countries,” “developing countries,” and “emerging economies.” How is an economy developed if it is shedding its industry and manufacturing? This is the reverse of the development process. Without realizing it, Kenny describes the unravelling of the US economy when he describes the decline of US manufacturing from 28 percent of US GDP in 1953 to 12% in 2012. The US now has the work force of a third world country, with the vast bulk of the population employed in lowly paid domestic services. The US work force no longer looks like the work force of a developed country. It looks like third world India’s work force of three decades ago.
Kenny and junk economists speak of the decline of US manufacturing jobs as if they are not being offshored to countries where labor is cheap but replaced by automation. No doubt there has been automation, and more ways of replacing humans with machines will be found. But if manufacturing jobs are things of the past, why is China’s sudden and rapid rise to economic power accompanied by 100 million manufacturing jobs? Apple computers are not made in China by robots. If robots are making Apple computers, it would be just as cheap to make the computers in the US. The Chinese manufacturing workforce is almost the size of the entire US work force.
US companies employ Americans to market the products that are produced abroad for sale in the US. This is why US corporations employ Americans mainly in service jobs. Foreigners make the goods, and Americans sell them.
Economic development has always been about acquiring the capital, technology, business knowledge, and trained workforce to make valuable things that can be sold at home and abroad. US capital and technology are being located abroad, and the trained domestic workforce is disappearing from disuse and abandonment. The US is falling out of the ranks of the industrialized countries and is on the path to becoming an undeveloped economy.
Link:
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/
Paul Craig Roberts
Last week, I explained how economists and policymakers destroyed our economy for the sake of short-term corporate profits from jobs offshoring and financial deregulation.
That same week Business Week published an article, “Factory Jobs Are Gone. Get Over It,” by Charles Kenny. Kenny expresses the view of establishment economists, such as Brookings Institute economist Justin Wolfers who wants to know “What’s with the political fetish for manufacturing? Are factories really so awesome?”
“Not really,” Kenny says. Citing Eric Fisher of the Cleveland Federal Reserve Bank, Kenny reports that wages rise most rapidly in those states that most quickly abandon manufacturing. Kenny cites Gary Hufbauer, once an academic colleague of mine now at the Peterson Institute, who claims that the 2009 tariffs applied to Chinese tire imports cost US consumers $1 billion in higher prices and 3,731 lost retail jobs. Note the precision of the jobs loss, right down to the last 31.
In support of the argument that Americans are better off without manufacturing jobs, Kenny cites MIT and Harvard academic economists to the effect that there is no evidence that manufacturing tends to cluster, thus disputing the view that there are economies from manufacturers tending to congregate in the same areas where they benefit from an experienced work force and established supply chains.
Perhaps the MIT and Harvard economists did their study after US manufacturing centers became shells of their former selves and Detroit lost 25% of its population, Gary Indiana lost 22% of its population, Flint Michigan lost 18% of its population, Cleveland lost 17% of its population, and St Louis lost 20% of its population. If the economists’ studies were done after manufacturing had departed, they would not find manufacturing concentrated in locations where it formerly flourished. MIT and Harvard economists might find this an idea too large to comprehend.
Kenny’s answer to the displaced manufacturing workers is–you guessed it–jobs training. He cites MIT economist David Autor who thinks the problem is the federal government only spends $1 on retraining for every $400 that it spends on supporting displaced workers.
These arguments are so absurd as to be mindless. Let’s examine them. What jobs are the displaced manufacturing workers to be trained for? Why, service jobs, of course. Kenny actually thinks that “service industries–hotels, hospitals, media, and accounting–have taken up the slack.” (I don’t know where he gets media and accounting from; scant sign of such jobs are found in the payroll jobs reports.) Moreover, service jobs have certainly not taken up the slack as the rising rate of long-term unemployment and declining labor force participation rate prove.
Nontradable service sector jobs such as hotel maids, hospital orderlies, retail clerks, waitresses and bartenders are low productivity, low value-added jobs that cannot pay incomes comparable to manufacturing jobs. The long term decline in real median family income relates to the movement offshore of manufacturing jobs and tradable professional service jobs, such as software engineering, IT, research and design.
Moreover, domestic service jobs do not produce exportable goods and services. A country without manufactures has little with which to earn foreign exchange in order to pay for its imports of its shoes, clothing, manufactured goods, high-technology products, Apple computers, and increasingly food. Therefore, that country’s trade deficit widens as each year it owes more and more to foreigners.
A country whose best known products are fraudulent and toxic financial instruments and GMO foods that no one wants cannot pay for its imports except by signing over its existing assets. The foreigners buy up US assets with their trade surpluses. Consequently, income from rents, interest, dividends, capital gains, and profits leave US pockets for foreign pockets. It is a safe bet that Hufbauer did not include any of these costs, or maybe even the loss of US tire workers’ wages and tire manufacturers’ profits, when he concluded that trying to save US tire manufacturing jobs cost more than it was worth.
Eric Fisher’s argument that the highest wage growth is found in areas where higher productivity manufacturing jobs are most rapidly replaced with lower productivity domestic service jobs is beyond absurd. (Possibly Fisher did not say this; I’m taking Kenny’s word for it.) It has always been a foundation of labor economics that workers are paid the value of their contribution to output. Manufacturing employees working with technology embodied in plant and equipment produce more value per man hour than maids changing sheets and bartenders mixing drinks.
In my book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism And Economic Dissolution Of The West (2013), I point out the obvious mistakes in “studies” by Matthew Slaughter, a former member of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors, and Harvard professor Michael Porter. These academic economists conclude on the basis of extraordinary errors and ignorance of empirical facts, that jobs offshoring is good for Americans. They were able to reach this conclusion despite the absence of any visibility of this good, and they hold to this absurd conclusion despite the inability of a “recovery” (or lack of one) that is 4.5 years old to get off the ground and get employment back up to where it was six years ago. They hold to their “education is the answer” solution despite the growing percentage of university graduates who cannot find employment.
Michael Hudson is certainly correct to call economists purveyors of “junk economics.” Indeed, I wonder if economists even have junk value. But they are well paid by Wall Street and the offshoring corporations.
What the Brookings Institute’s Justin Wolfers needs to ask himself is: what is the redefinition of economic development? For my lifetime the definition of a developed economy is an industrialized economy. It has always been “the industrialized countries” that occupy the status of “developed economies,” contrasted with “undeveloped countries,” “developing countries,” and “emerging economies.” How is an economy developed if it is shedding its industry and manufacturing? This is the reverse of the development process. Without realizing it, Kenny describes the unravelling of the US economy when he describes the decline of US manufacturing from 28 percent of US GDP in 1953 to 12% in 2012. The US now has the work force of a third world country, with the vast bulk of the population employed in lowly paid domestic services. The US work force no longer looks like the work force of a developed country. It looks like third world India’s work force of three decades ago.
Kenny and junk economists speak of the decline of US manufacturing jobs as if they are not being offshored to countries where labor is cheap but replaced by automation. No doubt there has been automation, and more ways of replacing humans with machines will be found. But if manufacturing jobs are things of the past, why is China’s sudden and rapid rise to economic power accompanied by 100 million manufacturing jobs? Apple computers are not made in China by robots. If robots are making Apple computers, it would be just as cheap to make the computers in the US. The Chinese manufacturing workforce is almost the size of the entire US work force.
US companies employ Americans to market the products that are produced abroad for sale in the US. This is why US corporations employ Americans mainly in service jobs. Foreigners make the goods, and Americans sell them.
Economic development has always been about acquiring the capital, technology, business knowledge, and trained workforce to make valuable things that can be sold at home and abroad. US capital and technology are being located abroad, and the trained domestic workforce is disappearing from disuse and abandonment. The US is falling out of the ranks of the industrialized countries and is on the path to becoming an undeveloped economy.
Link:
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/
If only Obama would admit it...
Obama and the State of the Onion Address
Jon Rappoport
Apparently, the President had ingested some kind of weird drug, because when he stepped to the podium he didn’t look at the teleprompter. He just started talking.
“…like every other recent President, when I take to this platform I’m expected to tell a certain number of lies dressed up as the truth. And believe me, folks, I had a few whoppers ready to go.
“But now I feel like doing something else. I’m not going to delve into the many scandals of my administration, because examining them and taking them apart and exposing the lies would keep us here all night and into tomorrow.
“Instead, I just want to explain my overarching agenda. It’s the same agenda every modern President has fronted for. I’m not really doing anything new. That’s a myth.
“You see, in order to become President in the first place, I had to sign on to the scheme to debase, throttle, and weaken this country. I have my methods. Every President has his own.
“Weakening America is part and parcel of Globalism. Ultimately, America will not the lead the way into what has been called the New World Order. International heavy hitters, bankers, and corporations will carry that ball. America will go along, with its population of sleeping masses.
“So-called Pax Americanus, or imperial American empire, has been shelved, in favor of a much larger operation.
“My basic job is allowing all this to happen, so we end up with a global management system, in which the individual is enmeshed.
“With some degree of accuracy, you could say that everything I’ve been doing is a smokescreen to obscure the march of Globalism.
“We politicians view humans at large as dangerous and badly programmed biological machines. Until new programming can be inserted universally, we keep things in check. We hold the fort.
“For the next two years, I’ll continue clamping down on rights and freedoms. I’ll support the Surveillance State. I’ll take away guns. I’ll step up psychiatric intervention. I’ll increase debt. I’ll keep unemployment high. I’ll probably launch a few more military interventions. Expect more mass shootings, which are covert actions, with appointed patsies to take the fall.
“I’ll allow the expanded militarization of local police forces. I’ll intercede, wherever possible, to stop individuals from living off the grid. I’ll try to mangle the spirit of self-sufficiency in whatever form it occurs.
“I’ll assist mega-corporations. I’ll keep as many doors open for Monsanto as I can.
“You get my drift. It’s business as usual. In my case, I’ll try to up the ante and intensify the collapse of America.
“Did someone put something in my cigarette or coffee? I’m telling the truth. It feels strange, very strange.
“Anyway, here’s to One World under one authority. It’s the only solution to our problems. Trust me, I wouldn’t mislead you. Give up, give in, take the ride. It’s not so bad. Resistance is a fool’s errand. The people who are running things are out to destroy independence. Let them. By the time they’re finished, you’ll see that ‘equality’ isn’t so bad.
“One final random thought. Agents of the US government killed Martin Luther King. In case you didn’t know that. Good night and good luck.”
Link:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-and-the-state-of-the-onion-address.html
Jon Rappoport
Apparently, the President had ingested some kind of weird drug, because when he stepped to the podium he didn’t look at the teleprompter. He just started talking.
“…like every other recent President, when I take to this platform I’m expected to tell a certain number of lies dressed up as the truth. And believe me, folks, I had a few whoppers ready to go.
“But now I feel like doing something else. I’m not going to delve into the many scandals of my administration, because examining them and taking them apart and exposing the lies would keep us here all night and into tomorrow.
“Instead, I just want to explain my overarching agenda. It’s the same agenda every modern President has fronted for. I’m not really doing anything new. That’s a myth.
“You see, in order to become President in the first place, I had to sign on to the scheme to debase, throttle, and weaken this country. I have my methods. Every President has his own.
“Weakening America is part and parcel of Globalism. Ultimately, America will not the lead the way into what has been called the New World Order. International heavy hitters, bankers, and corporations will carry that ball. America will go along, with its population of sleeping masses.
“So-called Pax Americanus, or imperial American empire, has been shelved, in favor of a much larger operation.
“My basic job is allowing all this to happen, so we end up with a global management system, in which the individual is enmeshed.
“With some degree of accuracy, you could say that everything I’ve been doing is a smokescreen to obscure the march of Globalism.
“We politicians view humans at large as dangerous and badly programmed biological machines. Until new programming can be inserted universally, we keep things in check. We hold the fort.
“For the next two years, I’ll continue clamping down on rights and freedoms. I’ll support the Surveillance State. I’ll take away guns. I’ll step up psychiatric intervention. I’ll increase debt. I’ll keep unemployment high. I’ll probably launch a few more military interventions. Expect more mass shootings, which are covert actions, with appointed patsies to take the fall.
“I’ll allow the expanded militarization of local police forces. I’ll intercede, wherever possible, to stop individuals from living off the grid. I’ll try to mangle the spirit of self-sufficiency in whatever form it occurs.
“I’ll assist mega-corporations. I’ll keep as many doors open for Monsanto as I can.
“You get my drift. It’s business as usual. In my case, I’ll try to up the ante and intensify the collapse of America.
“Did someone put something in my cigarette or coffee? I’m telling the truth. It feels strange, very strange.
“Anyway, here’s to One World under one authority. It’s the only solution to our problems. Trust me, I wouldn’t mislead you. Give up, give in, take the ride. It’s not so bad. Resistance is a fool’s errand. The people who are running things are out to destroy independence. Let them. By the time they’re finished, you’ll see that ‘equality’ isn’t so bad.
“One final random thought. Agents of the US government killed Martin Luther King. In case you didn’t know that. Good night and good luck.”
Link:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-and-the-state-of-the-onion-address.html
Hilary Clinton, central planner...
The Secret Hillary Rodham Clinton
By Ralph Benko
As recounted in the previous column, the record is clear that Saul Alinsky, about whom the young Hillary Rodham wrote her Wellesley honor’s thesis, was neither communist nor conventional Big Government liberal. Hillary Rodham turned down a job offer from Alinsky. She turned aside from the path of anti-establishment populist.
Hillary Rodham took the road more traveled, that of conventional liberal. By word and deed she turned away from Alinsky’s optimistic participatory politics. She turned, instead, to central planning. What might that choice suggest?
Hillary’s honor’s thesis, THERE IS ONLY THE FIGHT, in full context, provides a clear picture of her decision-making. In Chapter IV, “PERSPECTIVES ON ALINSKY AND HIS MODEL” she writes:odel is that the removal of Alinsky drastically alters its composition.
Alinsky is a born organizer who is not easily duplicated, but, in addition to his skill, he is a man of exceptional charm.
…
[S]ome New Left strategists …, although, disenchanted with Alinsky-like faith in individuals, apply many of his tactics in confrontation politics.
The problems inherent in such an approach, including elitist arrogance and repressive intolerance, have become evident during recent university crises.
She then pivots to the main point: community organizing vs. central planning.
Accompanying the decline of the traditional neighborhood as a living unit [was] the massive centralization of power on the federal level…. Federal centralization reduced local and state power…
.
Thus, we find ourselves in the middle of an urban crisis which is really a crisis of community power.
…
One … element is the role of participation. The … model assumed that participation, as the root of the democratic process, was a necessary and good thing.
Today, nothing is so certain ….
Alinsky and Rodham both were for social transformation. She found Alinsky admirable but probably not replicable at a national scale. Hillary Rodham confronted the choice between “community vs. centralized national planning in social change.” She chose central planning as her way.
>snip< Would Alinsky have concluded that in her choice to take the establishment route Hillary sold out? Or became subtly contaminated? Alinsky, in Rules (p. 13) states a critique of comparable choices in religion and business: Two examples would be the priest who wants to be a bishop and bootlicks and politicks his way up, justifying it with the rationale, “After I get to be bishop I’ll use my office for Christian reformation,” or the businessman who reasons, “First I’ll make my million and after that I’ll go for the real things in life.” Unfortunately one changes in many ways on the road to the bishopric or the first million, and then one says, “I’ll wait until I’m a cardinal and then I can be more effective,” or, “I can do a lot more after I get two million”—and so it goes. >snip< Moving from the secular political equivalent of priest to bishop to cardinal — and next, perhaps, to Pope — though, could it be occurring to her that central planning simply will not work? >snip< Hillary is in a bind. Hillary Clinton’s power base is made up of conventional establishment liberals who are about the only ones left who have much faith left in central planning. If Hillary merely repudiated conventional liberalism she would immediately be attacked from her left (as she was in 2008). Her political base could turn on her. Yet the ability to become a transformational agent of social betterment — through subsidiarity and human dignity — is within her grasp. It does not require her moving to the right. It requires her rediscovering authentic optimistic populism. She can do this in such a way as to lead, rather than alienate, her base. She can lead from liberal to radical. Radical does not mean destructive. Deriving from “root” it means fundamental. She cannot be unaware that the national mood has shifted away from faith in central planning. The ability to help people — and, more important, to facilitate people’s gaining their dignity by helping themselves — from the top down, is, at best, frightfully constrained. Obama’s efforts at central planning have pushed America as far to the right as it has been in 50 years. Hillary Clinton, her own woman, cannot possibly be interested in being cast in the role of “Obama’s third term.” If the GOP nominates a populist candidate, one optimistic about citizen participation, a philosophy of conventional liberal central planning could be Hillary Clinton’s Achilles heel. >snip< There is a clear way out of this bind: to go back and follow the Alinsky breadcrumb trail. Alinsky: “Denial of the opportunity to participate is the denial of human dignity and democracy. It will not work.” The cultivation of human dignity through participation is the true rule for radicals.
Link:
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/01/the-secret-hillary-rodham-clinton.html
By Ralph Benko
As recounted in the previous column, the record is clear that Saul Alinsky, about whom the young Hillary Rodham wrote her Wellesley honor’s thesis, was neither communist nor conventional Big Government liberal. Hillary Rodham turned down a job offer from Alinsky. She turned aside from the path of anti-establishment populist.
Hillary Rodham took the road more traveled, that of conventional liberal. By word and deed she turned away from Alinsky’s optimistic participatory politics. She turned, instead, to central planning. What might that choice suggest?
Hillary’s honor’s thesis, THERE IS ONLY THE FIGHT, in full context, provides a clear picture of her decision-making. In Chapter IV, “PERSPECTIVES ON ALINSKY AND HIS MODEL” she writes:odel is that the removal of Alinsky drastically alters its composition.
Alinsky is a born organizer who is not easily duplicated, but, in addition to his skill, he is a man of exceptional charm.
…
[S]ome New Left strategists …, although, disenchanted with Alinsky-like faith in individuals, apply many of his tactics in confrontation politics.
The problems inherent in such an approach, including elitist arrogance and repressive intolerance, have become evident during recent university crises.
She then pivots to the main point: community organizing vs. central planning.
Accompanying the decline of the traditional neighborhood as a living unit [was] the massive centralization of power on the federal level…. Federal centralization reduced local and state power…
.
Thus, we find ourselves in the middle of an urban crisis which is really a crisis of community power.
…
One … element is the role of participation. The … model assumed that participation, as the root of the democratic process, was a necessary and good thing.
Today, nothing is so certain ….
Alinsky and Rodham both were for social transformation. She found Alinsky admirable but probably not replicable at a national scale. Hillary Rodham confronted the choice between “community vs. centralized national planning in social change.” She chose central planning as her way.
>snip< Would Alinsky have concluded that in her choice to take the establishment route Hillary sold out? Or became subtly contaminated? Alinsky, in Rules (p. 13) states a critique of comparable choices in religion and business: Two examples would be the priest who wants to be a bishop and bootlicks and politicks his way up, justifying it with the rationale, “After I get to be bishop I’ll use my office for Christian reformation,” or the businessman who reasons, “First I’ll make my million and after that I’ll go for the real things in life.” Unfortunately one changes in many ways on the road to the bishopric or the first million, and then one says, “I’ll wait until I’m a cardinal and then I can be more effective,” or, “I can do a lot more after I get two million”—and so it goes. >snip< Moving from the secular political equivalent of priest to bishop to cardinal — and next, perhaps, to Pope — though, could it be occurring to her that central planning simply will not work? >snip< Hillary is in a bind. Hillary Clinton’s power base is made up of conventional establishment liberals who are about the only ones left who have much faith left in central planning. If Hillary merely repudiated conventional liberalism she would immediately be attacked from her left (as she was in 2008). Her political base could turn on her. Yet the ability to become a transformational agent of social betterment — through subsidiarity and human dignity — is within her grasp. It does not require her moving to the right. It requires her rediscovering authentic optimistic populism. She can do this in such a way as to lead, rather than alienate, her base. She can lead from liberal to radical. Radical does not mean destructive. Deriving from “root” it means fundamental. She cannot be unaware that the national mood has shifted away from faith in central planning. The ability to help people — and, more important, to facilitate people’s gaining their dignity by helping themselves — from the top down, is, at best, frightfully constrained. Obama’s efforts at central planning have pushed America as far to the right as it has been in 50 years. Hillary Clinton, her own woman, cannot possibly be interested in being cast in the role of “Obama’s third term.” If the GOP nominates a populist candidate, one optimistic about citizen participation, a philosophy of conventional liberal central planning could be Hillary Clinton’s Achilles heel. >snip< There is a clear way out of this bind: to go back and follow the Alinsky breadcrumb trail. Alinsky: “Denial of the opportunity to participate is the denial of human dignity and democracy. It will not work.” The cultivation of human dignity through participation is the true rule for radicals.
Link:
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/01/the-secret-hillary-rodham-clinton.html
America and World War I...
Hubris no greater than America’s led Europe to World War I.
By Paul Gottfried
Perhaps no war has been treated more tendentiously—and in recent decades more inappropriately—than World War I. Since the 1960s, a fixed view of that conflict has developed in academic and journalistic circles that places the blame almost entirely on one side. The German government, led by an evil, authoritarian emperor and his bellicose general staff, unleashed a struggle that cost more than 30 million lives and wrought untold destruction on the European continent.
According to the scholar Fritz Fischer—who became the German Left’s darling, despite his background as a loyal Nazi—the war was planned and initiated by a Germany bent on world domination. What other belligerents did to get the ball rolling in 1914, Fischer suggests in his 1961 book Germany’s Bid for World Power, was inconsequential. The rest of Europe was pulled into a struggle that Germany had planned for decades, a conflagration its antidemocratic ruling class and ultranationalist public happily initiated.
Defenses of the Fischer thesis and other versions of the outbreak of the Great War stressing exclusive German or Austro-German responsibility have been driven by moral and ideological considerations. Unfortunately, there are facts that historians until recently tried studiously to avoid. As critics of Fischer’s position were already showing in the early ’60s, his singling out of his own country, already burdened with Nazi crimes, for starting an earlier Euro- pean war was based on questionable investigative methods.
Fischer and his followers ignored what other European countries did to provoke the Great War, unfairly blackened the reputation of German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg—who tried earnestly to iron out differences between England and his country for at least three years before the war started—and misquoted key German actors in the conflict, such as the Kaiser and the chief of the German general staff.
In recent decades those who write non-prescribed histories dealing with the outbreak of the First World War typically ignore Fischer and like-minded interpreters. Niall Ferguson in The Pity of War, Konrad Canis in his massive three-volume German work on the failures of German diplomacy leading to the “abyss” in 1914, Christopher Clark in The Sleepwalkers, and Sean McMeekin in The Russian Origins of World War One have all produced estimable studies about the Great War that are clearly incompatible with Fischer’s stress on exclusive German guilt.
All the Great Powers behaved rashly, and to their credit the most scrupulous historians do not spare any of the actors on the Allied side. The avoidable disaster of 1914 teaches us, according to Christopher Clark, how the Great Powers “sleep-walked” their way into a war from which European civilization never recovered. Russia in its drive to dismantle Turkey and control the Dardanelles; Britain in its efforts to reduce a rival’s power even at the risk of encircling the German Empire with hostile alliances; Serbia in its attempts to split apart the Habsburg Empire; and France in its desperate desire to punish the Germans for defeat in the Franco-Prussian War all helped stir the pot...
Read the rest:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/sleepwalk-to-suicide/
Moreover, a Pew poll last fall found that 52 percent of the nation approves of U.S. disengagement, saying America should “mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own.”
Is Kerry In Denial?
By Patrick J. Buchanan
Does John Kerry understand the world he inherited? Is he in denial?
Consider. At Davos, Switzerland, Kerry called it a “myth” that America is withdrawing, and “the most bewildering version of this disengagement myth is about a supposed U.S. retreat from the Middle East.”
Is he serious? How else does Kerry describe Obama’s pullout of all U.S. troops from Iraq, and from Afghanistan by year’s end?
Syria is “someone else’s civil war,” says President Obama. If we do any strikes there, promised Kerry, they will be “unbelievably small,” and rest assured there will be “no [U.S.] boots on the ground.”
When al-Qaida and its allies seized Ramadi and Fallujah in Anbar province, Kerry rushed to the microphones: “We’re not … contemplating returning. We’re not contemplating putting boots on the ground. This is their fight. … this is a fight that belongs to the Iraqis.”
Yes it is. But does this sound like the defiant “This will not stand!” of George H. W. Bush, after Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait?
Moreover, a Pew poll last fall found that 52 percent of the nation approves of U.S. disengagement, saying America should “mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own.”
Staying out of other countries’ quarrels and other nations’ wars is what Americans want, and Obama is delivering.
Why does John Kerry deny the obvious?
To his credit, the secretary has undertaken three diplomatic initiatives, the success of any one of which could earn him a Nobel.
The Geneva II Conference on Syria, the U.S.-U.N. negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, and the Palestinian-Israeli peace initiative.
Yet Kerry’s own undiplomatic conduct may be imperiling two of his initiatives, and naivete and hubris may be blinding him to the coming collapse of the third.
On arrival at Geneva II, Kerry demanded that Iran be disinvited, then launched into a tirade insisting that Assad get out of Damascus:
“There is no way … that the man who led the brutal response to his own people could regain the legitimacy to govern.”
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem was right back in his face: “No one, Mr. Kerry, has the right to provide legitimacy … except for the Syrian people.”
Dismissing Kerry’s call for a transitional government without Assad, Moallem implied that not only was Kerry’s position irrelevant — Assad currently holds the whip hand in Syria and is going nowhere — but irrational from the standpoint of U.S. national interests.
“Those doing suicide attacks in New York,” Moallem instructed Kerry, “are the same as those doing it in Syria.”
The Washington Post backed Moallem with a report that Ayman al-Zawahiri has called on all jihadists in Syria to line up in “one rowlike, solid structure in confronting your sectarian, secularist enemy,” the Assad regime, that is backed by “Iran, Russia and China.”
“What makes our hearts bleed,” said Zawahiri, “is the hostile sedition, which has intensified among the ranks of the mujahideen of Islam.”
Can Kerry explain why America’s goal remains the ouster of Assad, when the offensive coordinator for the rebels who would take power is the successor to Osama bin Laden?
Asked what would happen should Iran backslide on the new interim nuclear agreement, Kerry rattled America’s rockets:
“If they do that, then the military option that is available to the United States is ready and prepared to do what it would have to do.”
Who is Kerry to threaten a war Congress has never authorized?
How does it advance diplomacy to threaten publicly to bomb your negotiating partners? Kerry talks as though he were back in the Senate.
The head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard dismissed Kerry’s threat as “ridiculous,” called his negotiating strategy “bankrupt” and warned that “the revolutionary people” of Iran are anxious for battle with the Americans.
If Kerry’s wants a deal, how does this bellicose bluster help?
Kerry now says that Iran will have to “dismantle” centrifuges. But is not America’s objective here proof positive Iran has no nuclear weapon or weapons program, and that its nuclear program is peaceful?
When did the destruction of Iranian centrifuges become the U.S. demand? Tehran has now planted its feet in concrete that there will be no dismantling of centrifuges, and “Bibi” Netanyahu is crowing that this means the failure of the talks.
As for an Israeli-Palestinian deal in which Kerry has invested 10 trips, Israeli economics minister Naftali Bennett calls it “a joke.”
Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon says that Kerry “is acting out of misplaced obsession and messianic fervor,” that his peace plan “is not worth the paper it is written on,” that he wishes Kerry would get his Nobel prize now, and leave Israel alone.
As for Bibi, who resigned from Ariel Sharon’s cabinet rather than accept a withdrawal from Gaza, he now says that not one settler on the West Bank will be uprooted, and not one settlement shut down.
Kerry is heading into a minefield. And so are we.
Link:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/patrick-j-buchanan/warmonger-in-denial/
By Patrick J. Buchanan
Does John Kerry understand the world he inherited? Is he in denial?
Consider. At Davos, Switzerland, Kerry called it a “myth” that America is withdrawing, and “the most bewildering version of this disengagement myth is about a supposed U.S. retreat from the Middle East.”
Is he serious? How else does Kerry describe Obama’s pullout of all U.S. troops from Iraq, and from Afghanistan by year’s end?
Syria is “someone else’s civil war,” says President Obama. If we do any strikes there, promised Kerry, they will be “unbelievably small,” and rest assured there will be “no [U.S.] boots on the ground.”
When al-Qaida and its allies seized Ramadi and Fallujah in Anbar province, Kerry rushed to the microphones: “We’re not … contemplating returning. We’re not contemplating putting boots on the ground. This is their fight. … this is a fight that belongs to the Iraqis.”
Yes it is. But does this sound like the defiant “This will not stand!” of George H. W. Bush, after Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait?
Moreover, a Pew poll last fall found that 52 percent of the nation approves of U.S. disengagement, saying America should “mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own.”
Staying out of other countries’ quarrels and other nations’ wars is what Americans want, and Obama is delivering.
Why does John Kerry deny the obvious?
To his credit, the secretary has undertaken three diplomatic initiatives, the success of any one of which could earn him a Nobel.
The Geneva II Conference on Syria, the U.S.-U.N. negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, and the Palestinian-Israeli peace initiative.
Yet Kerry’s own undiplomatic conduct may be imperiling two of his initiatives, and naivete and hubris may be blinding him to the coming collapse of the third.
On arrival at Geneva II, Kerry demanded that Iran be disinvited, then launched into a tirade insisting that Assad get out of Damascus:
“There is no way … that the man who led the brutal response to his own people could regain the legitimacy to govern.”
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem was right back in his face: “No one, Mr. Kerry, has the right to provide legitimacy … except for the Syrian people.”
Dismissing Kerry’s call for a transitional government without Assad, Moallem implied that not only was Kerry’s position irrelevant — Assad currently holds the whip hand in Syria and is going nowhere — but irrational from the standpoint of U.S. national interests.
“Those doing suicide attacks in New York,” Moallem instructed Kerry, “are the same as those doing it in Syria.”
The Washington Post backed Moallem with a report that Ayman al-Zawahiri has called on all jihadists in Syria to line up in “one rowlike, solid structure in confronting your sectarian, secularist enemy,” the Assad regime, that is backed by “Iran, Russia and China.”
“What makes our hearts bleed,” said Zawahiri, “is the hostile sedition, which has intensified among the ranks of the mujahideen of Islam.”
Can Kerry explain why America’s goal remains the ouster of Assad, when the offensive coordinator for the rebels who would take power is the successor to Osama bin Laden?
Asked what would happen should Iran backslide on the new interim nuclear agreement, Kerry rattled America’s rockets:
“If they do that, then the military option that is available to the United States is ready and prepared to do what it would have to do.”
Who is Kerry to threaten a war Congress has never authorized?
How does it advance diplomacy to threaten publicly to bomb your negotiating partners? Kerry talks as though he were back in the Senate.
The head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard dismissed Kerry’s threat as “ridiculous,” called his negotiating strategy “bankrupt” and warned that “the revolutionary people” of Iran are anxious for battle with the Americans.
If Kerry’s wants a deal, how does this bellicose bluster help?
Kerry now says that Iran will have to “dismantle” centrifuges. But is not America’s objective here proof positive Iran has no nuclear weapon or weapons program, and that its nuclear program is peaceful?
When did the destruction of Iranian centrifuges become the U.S. demand? Tehran has now planted its feet in concrete that there will be no dismantling of centrifuges, and “Bibi” Netanyahu is crowing that this means the failure of the talks.
As for an Israeli-Palestinian deal in which Kerry has invested 10 trips, Israeli economics minister Naftali Bennett calls it “a joke.”
Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon says that Kerry “is acting out of misplaced obsession and messianic fervor,” that his peace plan “is not worth the paper it is written on,” that he wishes Kerry would get his Nobel prize now, and leave Israel alone.
As for Bibi, who resigned from Ariel Sharon’s cabinet rather than accept a withdrawal from Gaza, he now says that not one settler on the West Bank will be uprooted, and not one settlement shut down.
Kerry is heading into a minefield. And so are we.
Link:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/patrick-j-buchanan/warmonger-in-denial/
"Can the government do anything right?"
Infinite Arrogance, Infinite Incompetence
Miss Ammerica, Miss Universe, Miss Governnment
By Fred Reed
Oh lord. Oh lord. Can the government do anything right? There is no evidence for it. None. Everything it touches turns to grotesque failure. It hurts me to contemplate the federal reigning monstrosity in the Yankee Capital. I may have to send out for a bottle of Padre Kino red to get me through it. The Great Purple Father is the worst wine known to man, thirty-nine cents a trainload. Never mind. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Nothing works, government-wise. Ponder health care, if you can stand it. One approach to keeping people alive and healthy is national health care, which many countries, such as France, have and it works. It’s because grown-ups run it. Or you can have private health care, which the US had and, though it was way overpriced and unwieldy, strangled by paperwork and corruption, more or less worked, sort of.So the gummint comes up with Obamacare, that doesn’t work at all. The feds can’t even write the freaking computer program. Yes, here in the world’s greatest technological power. We ought to contract the software to Guatemala, which couldn’t do it either but would cost less.
The War on Drugs, another disaster. A half century, billions of dollars, countless stupid laws, Mexico a war zone. Result? Every drug known to man, woman, or hermaphrodite is for sale at great prices in every high school in America. Another triumph of private enterprise over governmental regulartion. If Washington tried to provide free drugs, it couldn’t come close. No one would be able to get so much as an aspirin.
Race relations. Another charred ruin. Better than a half century into the Great Society, huge numbers of blacks live trapped in urban Bantustans, Newark, Detroit, Birmingham, Philadelphia, barely literate if at all, unemployed and unemployable, bastardy almost universal, utterly dependent on federal charity, without the slightest hope that any of this will change. If Washington had deliberately tried to make a greater mess, it couldn’t have.
Open borders. Another train wreck started, stage-managed, and supported by Washington. The merest glance at the outside world would show that mixing immiscible peoples regularly results in strife, division, decline and, often, civil war. Coming to a theater near you. Merry Christmas.
The military. A trillion withering green ones a year and we get forces that can’t beat a few pissed-off goat-herds with AKs. Which actually is a good thing since they shouldn’t be trying. A chronicle of unmitigated failure, and always for the same reason: trying to use shiny toys to whip whole countries that don’t want us there. Hey, if it doesn’t work, let’s do it again.
And now Washington wants wars with Iran and China, when it can’t beat Yemen. You have to concede a certain logic here: if you can’t defeat Afghanistan, a billion Han Chinese will be a cakewalk.
Economic policy. If any. Washington drives the country bankrupt, colludes with Wall Street, to the extent that there is a distinction between Washington and Wall Street, and brings on the sub-prime crash. The swine tell us that we are the greatest economic powerhouse known to creation, while unemployment is ghastly, college grads have to live with their parents, food stamps spread, and the middle class lives paycheck to paycheck. Oh thank you, thank you.
Constitutional government. Gone. Some of us remember it, as a trembling octogenarian remembers ardor in the back seat of his ’53 Chevy. The young will know it only as an exotic idea. Bush II began the serious bleeding. Obama, the first African-American president and much more African than American, opens the larger veins.
Unfettered surveillance of absolutely everything, militarized police, the military as private presidential army, searches without probable or indeed any cause, photo ID required to buy train tickets, on and on.
Perhaps worse, the endless regulation by Washington, either directly or by federal pressure, of everything anybody ever does. The country was founded on the idea that most things were none of the government’s damned business. Today, everything is the government’s business. There is virtually nothing that cannot be controlled by some level of government.
Why is the use of steroids by baseball players of concern to Washington? Are bulked-up hitters a threat to the commonweal?
Why should smoking in bars be the concern of government? People who don’t like smoke can find other bars, or bars which decide to have no-smoking areas. Personally I don’t like being around people who talk loudly. Should law require no talking above a whisper in public establishments? Enforce it with audiometers built into tables?
Why is it the government’s business to decide that insisting on academic standards in schools is racist or that mentioning Creationism violates an imaginary separation of church and state? Why are the schools in Oklahoma not the concern of Oklahoma?
Why is it Washington’s business to insist that hiring and promotion in fire departments be based on race and sex rather than competence?
When a central government has unlimited powers, as Washington for practical purposes now does, the effect is to disenfranchise the rest of the country. Today the doctrines of States’ Rights and the Tenth Amendment are often regarded as quaint, obsolete, retrograde, or even conservative. It is none of these, except conservative. People in Montana, Mississippi, Massachusetts, and Washington have very different ideas about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When Washington imposes its one-size-fits-all laws, it imposes an alien culture on most. Never mind the hypocrisy—liberal whites in Washington avoid blacks like leprosy—but they truly regard themselves as divinely authorized to dictate to the rest of us.
Having power over every aspect of everybody’s life centralized in Washington means that any lobby, meaning self-interested predatory wallets, can pay Congress, venal by disposition, to enact any law the lobby chooses. Worse, an anonymous federal bureaucracy can make a politically-correct regulation forcing you to do things that you regard as morally and otherwise repulsive. For example, you have to be genitally groped by TSA. You have no recourse, no voice. Did you vote for this? Do you have any idea who to blame? If you write your ongressman, you will get a form letter expressing his deep gratitude for etc, and nothing else. Constituents are regarded by Congress as a pain in the ass. Will you call TSA to protest? Try calling a brick wall instead. Brick walls are not manipulatively dismissive.
I can’t stand it. Yes, I know, I am weak and lack moral character. It is shameful. But as I reflect on the stupid, corrupt, lunatic, and evil mass of brainless, half-assed dirtballs that run us, my only thought is to call for an air-drop of Padre Kino and an intravenous line. Drugs will get you through times of no government better than government will get your through times of no drugs. That’s just common sense.
Link:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/fred-reed/infinite-arrogance-infinite-incompetence-infinite-government/
Miss Ammerica, Miss Universe, Miss Governnment
By Fred Reed
Oh lord. Oh lord. Can the government do anything right? There is no evidence for it. None. Everything it touches turns to grotesque failure. It hurts me to contemplate the federal reigning monstrosity in the Yankee Capital. I may have to send out for a bottle of Padre Kino red to get me through it. The Great Purple Father is the worst wine known to man, thirty-nine cents a trainload. Never mind. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Nothing works, government-wise. Ponder health care, if you can stand it. One approach to keeping people alive and healthy is national health care, which many countries, such as France, have and it works. It’s because grown-ups run it. Or you can have private health care, which the US had and, though it was way overpriced and unwieldy, strangled by paperwork and corruption, more or less worked, sort of.So the gummint comes up with Obamacare, that doesn’t work at all. The feds can’t even write the freaking computer program. Yes, here in the world’s greatest technological power. We ought to contract the software to Guatemala, which couldn’t do it either but would cost less.
The War on Drugs, another disaster. A half century, billions of dollars, countless stupid laws, Mexico a war zone. Result? Every drug known to man, woman, or hermaphrodite is for sale at great prices in every high school in America. Another triumph of private enterprise over governmental regulartion. If Washington tried to provide free drugs, it couldn’t come close. No one would be able to get so much as an aspirin.
Race relations. Another charred ruin. Better than a half century into the Great Society, huge numbers of blacks live trapped in urban Bantustans, Newark, Detroit, Birmingham, Philadelphia, barely literate if at all, unemployed and unemployable, bastardy almost universal, utterly dependent on federal charity, without the slightest hope that any of this will change. If Washington had deliberately tried to make a greater mess, it couldn’t have.
Open borders. Another train wreck started, stage-managed, and supported by Washington. The merest glance at the outside world would show that mixing immiscible peoples regularly results in strife, division, decline and, often, civil war. Coming to a theater near you. Merry Christmas.
The military. A trillion withering green ones a year and we get forces that can’t beat a few pissed-off goat-herds with AKs. Which actually is a good thing since they shouldn’t be trying. A chronicle of unmitigated failure, and always for the same reason: trying to use shiny toys to whip whole countries that don’t want us there. Hey, if it doesn’t work, let’s do it again.
And now Washington wants wars with Iran and China, when it can’t beat Yemen. You have to concede a certain logic here: if you can’t defeat Afghanistan, a billion Han Chinese will be a cakewalk.
Economic policy. If any. Washington drives the country bankrupt, colludes with Wall Street, to the extent that there is a distinction between Washington and Wall Street, and brings on the sub-prime crash. The swine tell us that we are the greatest economic powerhouse known to creation, while unemployment is ghastly, college grads have to live with their parents, food stamps spread, and the middle class lives paycheck to paycheck. Oh thank you, thank you.
Constitutional government. Gone. Some of us remember it, as a trembling octogenarian remembers ardor in the back seat of his ’53 Chevy. The young will know it only as an exotic idea. Bush II began the serious bleeding. Obama, the first African-American president and much more African than American, opens the larger veins.
Unfettered surveillance of absolutely everything, militarized police, the military as private presidential army, searches without probable or indeed any cause, photo ID required to buy train tickets, on and on.
Perhaps worse, the endless regulation by Washington, either directly or by federal pressure, of everything anybody ever does. The country was founded on the idea that most things were none of the government’s damned business. Today, everything is the government’s business. There is virtually nothing that cannot be controlled by some level of government.
Why is the use of steroids by baseball players of concern to Washington? Are bulked-up hitters a threat to the commonweal?
Why should smoking in bars be the concern of government? People who don’t like smoke can find other bars, or bars which decide to have no-smoking areas. Personally I don’t like being around people who talk loudly. Should law require no talking above a whisper in public establishments? Enforce it with audiometers built into tables?
Why is it the government’s business to decide that insisting on academic standards in schools is racist or that mentioning Creationism violates an imaginary separation of church and state? Why are the schools in Oklahoma not the concern of Oklahoma?
Why is it Washington’s business to insist that hiring and promotion in fire departments be based on race and sex rather than competence?
When a central government has unlimited powers, as Washington for practical purposes now does, the effect is to disenfranchise the rest of the country. Today the doctrines of States’ Rights and the Tenth Amendment are often regarded as quaint, obsolete, retrograde, or even conservative. It is none of these, except conservative. People in Montana, Mississippi, Massachusetts, and Washington have very different ideas about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When Washington imposes its one-size-fits-all laws, it imposes an alien culture on most. Never mind the hypocrisy—liberal whites in Washington avoid blacks like leprosy—but they truly regard themselves as divinely authorized to dictate to the rest of us.
Having power over every aspect of everybody’s life centralized in Washington means that any lobby, meaning self-interested predatory wallets, can pay Congress, venal by disposition, to enact any law the lobby chooses. Worse, an anonymous federal bureaucracy can make a politically-correct regulation forcing you to do things that you regard as morally and otherwise repulsive. For example, you have to be genitally groped by TSA. You have no recourse, no voice. Did you vote for this? Do you have any idea who to blame? If you write your ongressman, you will get a form letter expressing his deep gratitude for etc, and nothing else. Constituents are regarded by Congress as a pain in the ass. Will you call TSA to protest? Try calling a brick wall instead. Brick walls are not manipulatively dismissive.
I can’t stand it. Yes, I know, I am weak and lack moral character. It is shameful. But as I reflect on the stupid, corrupt, lunatic, and evil mass of brainless, half-assed dirtballs that run us, my only thought is to call for an air-drop of Padre Kino and an intravenous line. Drugs will get you through times of no government better than government will get your through times of no drugs. That’s just common sense.
Link:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/fred-reed/infinite-arrogance-infinite-incompetence-infinite-government/
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Instead of watching Barry Obama offer up more lies and deception tonight, spend some time reading the many promises he hasn't delivered on from previous SOTU speeches...
Obama's 82 Unfulfilled Promises from Earlier SOTU Addresses
I am glad most of these Obama promises haven't been kept, but the list serves as a good preface to his speech and an understanding of the hot air he will blow.
Grabien writes:
Tonight President Obama delivers his fifth State of the Union address (sixth if you count his unofficial 2009 address), during which he is expected to engage the usual custom of issuing a variety of new promises.
But what of past promises? Have they been fulfilled?
Do you remember that in 2009 he promised to create universal private retirement savings accounts?
Or his 2009 promise to close Gitmo?
Or his 2010 promise that ObamaCare would not interfere with Americans' existing health-care plans?
What about his promise to pass immigration reform, which he has repeated in almost every State of the Union address during his presidency?
Grabien went back and looked at all the promises Mr. Obama made in these five speeches. We count 82 promises that remain uncompleted. See for yourself.
[Full 12 minute video link]
[Condensed 4 minute version]
Here's the full list of unfulfilled promises:
2009
1: The American Investment and Recovery Act will create 3.9 million jobs over two years 90 percent of which will be in the private sector.
2: The HARP plan will help millions of families struggling to refinance and make payments on homes declining in value.
3: The recovery plan will double America's supply of renewable energy in three years.
4: The largest investment in research funding in America's history will spur discoveries and breakthroughs in energy, medicine, science, and technology.
5: Thousands of miles of power lines will be laid, bringing electricity to cities across America, and creating thousands of jobs.
6: By making homes and buildings more efficient, we will save billions of dollars on energy.
7: “We will launch a new effort to conquer a disease that has touched the lives of nearly every American, including me, by seeking a cure for cancer in our time.”
8: Promoting and funding preventive care will keep Americans healthy, and keep ObamaCare costs low.
9: To bring down the deficit by making government more efficient.
10: “I pledged to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term in office.”
11: $2 trillion will be cut from the budget over the next decade.
12: For families who make less than $250,000 per year, “you will not see your taxes increased a single dime.”
13: Comprehensive health care reform will strengthen Medicare in the years to come.
14: To develop a plan to strengthen Social Security in a similar way ...
15: ... While creating tax-free universal savings accounts for all Americans.
16: To close the Guantanamo Bay detention center.
2010
17: A new high-speed railroad in Tampa, Fla., funded by the Recovery Act.
18: The investment in research could lead to more efficient solar cells, or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy cells.
19: To build a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in the U.S.
20: To pass an energy reform bill that incentivizes clean energy.
21: ObamaCare allows the insured to keep their doctors and their plans.
22: ObamaCare reduces costs for families and companies.
23: ObamaCare will bring down the deficit by $1 trillion in the next two decades, according to the U.S. Budget Office.
24: To balance the stimulus and recovery spending, “starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years.”
25: “Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need, and sacrifice what we don't—”
26: “— And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will.”
27: “We will continue to go through the budget line-by-line, page-by-page, to eliminate programs that don't work.”
28: A bi-partisan fiscal commission will ensure that budget reform, and that won't be a “Washington gimmick.”
29: The Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law, which led to budget surplus in the 1990s.
30: “Tonight, I'm calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single website before there's a vote, so that the American people can see how their money's being spent.”
31: “I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics.”
32: “We should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system —”
33: “— to secure our borders, and to enforce our laws—”
34: “— and to ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation.”
2011
35: To meet energy goals, we will need to use wind, solar, natural gas, nuclear, and clean coal.
36: “Now, I strongly believe that we should take on once and for all the issue of illegal immigration.”
37: “I am prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws —”
38: “— and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows.”
39: “We will put put of Americans to work repairing our crumbling roads and bridges. We will make sure this is fully paid for —”
40: “— attract private investment —”
41: “— and pick projects based on what's best for the American economy, not politicians.”
42: Give 80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail in the next 25 years.
43: Make it possible for businesses to provide high speed wireless coverage to 98 percent of Americans in the next five years.
44: To lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years.
45: To reduce barriers to growth and investment by reviewing rules for unnecessary burdens on businesses.
46: ”So tonight, I am proposing that this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years.
47: The Affordable Care Act will slow the rising costs of Medicare and Medicaid.
48: To rein in frivolous lawsuits by reforming medical malpractice laws in order to lower costs.
49: To re-organize government agencies to make the government more effective and efficient.
50: To create a website which details all government spending.
51: “If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it.”
2012
52: “If companies that choose to stay America and gets hit with the highest tax rate in the world, it makes no sense, and everyone knows it. So let's change it.”
53: “I want to cut through the maze of confusing training programs, so that from now on, people like Jackie have one program, one website, and one place to go for all the information and help that they need.”
54: “It is time to turn our unemployment system into a re-employment system that puts people to work.”
55: “I believe as strongly as ever that we should take on illegal immigration.”
56: “I am proposing that every state — every state — requires that all students stay in high school until they graduate, or until they turn 18.”
57: “Tonight, I am directing my administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential off-shore oil and gas resources.”
58: “This country needs and all-out, all-of-the-above strategy, that develops every available source of American energy.”
59: “We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly 100 years. And my administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy.”
60: “I've ordered every federal agency to eliminate rules that don't make sense. We've already announced over 500 reforms.”
61: “We will also establish a financial crimes unit of highly trained investigators to crack down on financial fraud, and protect people's investments.”
62: “I've asked this Congress to grant me the authority to consolidate the federal bureaucracy, so that our government is leaner, quicker, and more responsive to the needs of the American people.”
63: To end partisan gridlock based on strongly held ideology.
2013
64: To enact Medicare reforms that give the same savings as the reforms of the Simpson-Bowles commission.
65: “We'll reduce tax-payer subsidies to prescription drug companies —”
66: “— and ask more from wealthy seniors.”
67: “We'll bring down costs by changing the way our government pays for Medicare.”
68: Save money by getting rid of tax breaks for the wealthy.
69: Reform taxes that rewards job creation and reduces deficit.
70: Cut red tape to make it easy to obtain oil and gas permits.
71: Create energy trust to drive development of new technology to shift cars and trucks off of oil and gas.
72: “I propose a fix-it-first program to put people to work on our most urgent repairs.”
73: To make pre-school available to every child in America.
74: To make affordability and value a factor in deciding which colleges receive federal aid.
75: “The time has come to pass comprehensive immigration reform.”
76: To raise the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour.
77: Incentivize hiring of currently unemployed people.
78: Put people back to work rebuilding run-down neighborhoods.
79: Give tax credits to businesses that hire and invest.
80: Remove financial deterrents to marriage for low-income couples, and encourage fatherhood.
81: “By the end of next year, our war in Afghanistan will be over.”
82: “Our government should not make promises we can't keep, but we must keep the promises we've already made.”
Link:
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/01/obamas-82-unfulfilled-promises-from.html#more
I am glad most of these Obama promises haven't been kept, but the list serves as a good preface to his speech and an understanding of the hot air he will blow.
Grabien writes:
Tonight President Obama delivers his fifth State of the Union address (sixth if you count his unofficial 2009 address), during which he is expected to engage the usual custom of issuing a variety of new promises.
But what of past promises? Have they been fulfilled?
Do you remember that in 2009 he promised to create universal private retirement savings accounts?
Or his 2009 promise to close Gitmo?
Or his 2010 promise that ObamaCare would not interfere with Americans' existing health-care plans?
What about his promise to pass immigration reform, which he has repeated in almost every State of the Union address during his presidency?
Grabien went back and looked at all the promises Mr. Obama made in these five speeches. We count 82 promises that remain uncompleted. See for yourself.
[Full 12 minute video link]
[Condensed 4 minute version]
Here's the full list of unfulfilled promises:
2009
1: The American Investment and Recovery Act will create 3.9 million jobs over two years 90 percent of which will be in the private sector.
2: The HARP plan will help millions of families struggling to refinance and make payments on homes declining in value.
3: The recovery plan will double America's supply of renewable energy in three years.
4: The largest investment in research funding in America's history will spur discoveries and breakthroughs in energy, medicine, science, and technology.
5: Thousands of miles of power lines will be laid, bringing electricity to cities across America, and creating thousands of jobs.
6: By making homes and buildings more efficient, we will save billions of dollars on energy.
7: “We will launch a new effort to conquer a disease that has touched the lives of nearly every American, including me, by seeking a cure for cancer in our time.”
8: Promoting and funding preventive care will keep Americans healthy, and keep ObamaCare costs low.
9: To bring down the deficit by making government more efficient.
10: “I pledged to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term in office.”
11: $2 trillion will be cut from the budget over the next decade.
12: For families who make less than $250,000 per year, “you will not see your taxes increased a single dime.”
13: Comprehensive health care reform will strengthen Medicare in the years to come.
14: To develop a plan to strengthen Social Security in a similar way ...
15: ... While creating tax-free universal savings accounts for all Americans.
16: To close the Guantanamo Bay detention center.
2010
17: A new high-speed railroad in Tampa, Fla., funded by the Recovery Act.
18: The investment in research could lead to more efficient solar cells, or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy cells.
19: To build a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in the U.S.
20: To pass an energy reform bill that incentivizes clean energy.
21: ObamaCare allows the insured to keep their doctors and their plans.
22: ObamaCare reduces costs for families and companies.
23: ObamaCare will bring down the deficit by $1 trillion in the next two decades, according to the U.S. Budget Office.
24: To balance the stimulus and recovery spending, “starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years.”
25: “Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need, and sacrifice what we don't—”
26: “— And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will.”
27: “We will continue to go through the budget line-by-line, page-by-page, to eliminate programs that don't work.”
28: A bi-partisan fiscal commission will ensure that budget reform, and that won't be a “Washington gimmick.”
29: The Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law, which led to budget surplus in the 1990s.
30: “Tonight, I'm calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single website before there's a vote, so that the American people can see how their money's being spent.”
31: “I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics.”
32: “We should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system —”
33: “— to secure our borders, and to enforce our laws—”
34: “— and to ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation.”
2011
35: To meet energy goals, we will need to use wind, solar, natural gas, nuclear, and clean coal.
36: “Now, I strongly believe that we should take on once and for all the issue of illegal immigration.”
37: “I am prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws —”
38: “— and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows.”
39: “We will put put of Americans to work repairing our crumbling roads and bridges. We will make sure this is fully paid for —”
40: “— attract private investment —”
41: “— and pick projects based on what's best for the American economy, not politicians.”
42: Give 80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail in the next 25 years.
43: Make it possible for businesses to provide high speed wireless coverage to 98 percent of Americans in the next five years.
44: To lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years.
45: To reduce barriers to growth and investment by reviewing rules for unnecessary burdens on businesses.
46: ”So tonight, I am proposing that this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years.
47: The Affordable Care Act will slow the rising costs of Medicare and Medicaid.
48: To rein in frivolous lawsuits by reforming medical malpractice laws in order to lower costs.
49: To re-organize government agencies to make the government more effective and efficient.
50: To create a website which details all government spending.
51: “If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it.”
2012
52: “If companies that choose to stay America and gets hit with the highest tax rate in the world, it makes no sense, and everyone knows it. So let's change it.”
53: “I want to cut through the maze of confusing training programs, so that from now on, people like Jackie have one program, one website, and one place to go for all the information and help that they need.”
54: “It is time to turn our unemployment system into a re-employment system that puts people to work.”
55: “I believe as strongly as ever that we should take on illegal immigration.”
56: “I am proposing that every state — every state — requires that all students stay in high school until they graduate, or until they turn 18.”
57: “Tonight, I am directing my administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential off-shore oil and gas resources.”
58: “This country needs and all-out, all-of-the-above strategy, that develops every available source of American energy.”
59: “We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly 100 years. And my administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy.”
60: “I've ordered every federal agency to eliminate rules that don't make sense. We've already announced over 500 reforms.”
61: “We will also establish a financial crimes unit of highly trained investigators to crack down on financial fraud, and protect people's investments.”
62: “I've asked this Congress to grant me the authority to consolidate the federal bureaucracy, so that our government is leaner, quicker, and more responsive to the needs of the American people.”
63: To end partisan gridlock based on strongly held ideology.
2013
64: To enact Medicare reforms that give the same savings as the reforms of the Simpson-Bowles commission.
65: “We'll reduce tax-payer subsidies to prescription drug companies —”
66: “— and ask more from wealthy seniors.”
67: “We'll bring down costs by changing the way our government pays for Medicare.”
68: Save money by getting rid of tax breaks for the wealthy.
69: Reform taxes that rewards job creation and reduces deficit.
70: Cut red tape to make it easy to obtain oil and gas permits.
71: Create energy trust to drive development of new technology to shift cars and trucks off of oil and gas.
72: “I propose a fix-it-first program to put people to work on our most urgent repairs.”
73: To make pre-school available to every child in America.
74: To make affordability and value a factor in deciding which colleges receive federal aid.
75: “The time has come to pass comprehensive immigration reform.”
76: To raise the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour.
77: Incentivize hiring of currently unemployed people.
78: Put people back to work rebuilding run-down neighborhoods.
79: Give tax credits to businesses that hire and invest.
80: Remove financial deterrents to marriage for low-income couples, and encourage fatherhood.
81: “By the end of next year, our war in Afghanistan will be over.”
82: “Our government should not make promises we can't keep, but we must keep the promises we've already made.”
Link:
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/01/obamas-82-unfulfilled-promises-from.html#more
OOPS!!!
Schools, courts, government offices close in advance of possible winter weather
PENSACOLA, Fla. -
Schools, courts and government offices throughout the western Florida Panhandle plan to close because of anticipated snow and ice as a polar vortex grips much of the country.
The National Weather Service has issued a winter storm watch for the region. Forecasters say a mix of freezing rain and snow is expected Tuesday through Wednesday.
Read the rest:
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/panhandle-schools-to-close-for-possible-ice-snow/-/1637132/24143034/-/e27yp6z/-/index.html
Get your money out now...
Bank Run Fears Escalate as Russian Lender Bans Cash Withdrawals
Economic jitters continue to spread
Paul Joseph Watson
Fears of bank runs have escalated with the news that Russian lender ‘My Bank’ has banned all cash withdrawals until next week.
“Bloomberg reports that ‘My Bank’ – one of Russia’s top 200 lenders by assets – has introduced a complete ban on cash withdrawals until next week. While the Ruble has been losing ground rapidly recently, we suspect few have been expecting bank runs in Russia. Russia sovereign CDS had recently weakened to 4-month wides at 192bps,” reports Zero Hedge.
The source of the story is a person working inside the ‘My Bank’ call center, although officials for the bank have refused to comment.
On Saturday it emerged that HSBC was restricting large cash withdrawals for UK customers from £5000 upwards, forcing them to provide documentation of what they plan to spend the money on, a form of capital control that more and more banks are beginning to adopt.
This was followed by the story, which subsequently turned out to be false but caused market jitters nonetheless, that China’s commercial banks had been instructed to suspend cash transfers.
An IT glitch that prevented thousands of Lloyds Banking Group customers from withdrawing cash at ATMs in the UK also contributed to the concerns.
As we reported back in November, Chase Bank also recently imposed restrictions which prevent its customers from conducting over $50,000 in cash activity per month, as well as banning business customers from sending international wire transfers. Financial expert Gerald Celente said the news was a sign that Americans should prepare for a bank holiday.
Questions were already being asked of Chase after an incident last year when customers across the country attempted to withdraw cash from ATMs only to see that their account balance had been reduced to zero. The problem, which Chase attributed to a technical glitch, lasted for hours before it was fixed, prompting panic from some customers.
In November it was also reported that two of the biggest banks in America were stuffing their ATMs with 20-30 per cent more cash than usual in order to head off a potential bank run if the US defaults on its debt.
Link:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/bank-run-fears-escalate-as-russian-lender-bans-cash-withdrawals.html
Economic jitters continue to spread
Paul Joseph Watson
Fears of bank runs have escalated with the news that Russian lender ‘My Bank’ has banned all cash withdrawals until next week.
“Bloomberg reports that ‘My Bank’ – one of Russia’s top 200 lenders by assets – has introduced a complete ban on cash withdrawals until next week. While the Ruble has been losing ground rapidly recently, we suspect few have been expecting bank runs in Russia. Russia sovereign CDS had recently weakened to 4-month wides at 192bps,” reports Zero Hedge.
The source of the story is a person working inside the ‘My Bank’ call center, although officials for the bank have refused to comment.
On Saturday it emerged that HSBC was restricting large cash withdrawals for UK customers from £5000 upwards, forcing them to provide documentation of what they plan to spend the money on, a form of capital control that more and more banks are beginning to adopt.
This was followed by the story, which subsequently turned out to be false but caused market jitters nonetheless, that China’s commercial banks had been instructed to suspend cash transfers.
An IT glitch that prevented thousands of Lloyds Banking Group customers from withdrawing cash at ATMs in the UK also contributed to the concerns.
As we reported back in November, Chase Bank also recently imposed restrictions which prevent its customers from conducting over $50,000 in cash activity per month, as well as banning business customers from sending international wire transfers. Financial expert Gerald Celente said the news was a sign that Americans should prepare for a bank holiday.
Questions were already being asked of Chase after an incident last year when customers across the country attempted to withdraw cash from ATMs only to see that their account balance had been reduced to zero. The problem, which Chase attributed to a technical glitch, lasted for hours before it was fixed, prompting panic from some customers.
In November it was also reported that two of the biggest banks in America were stuffing their ATMs with 20-30 per cent more cash than usual in order to head off a potential bank run if the US defaults on its debt.
Link:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/bank-run-fears-escalate-as-russian-lender-bans-cash-withdrawals.html
"The report showed that in 2005, 57.2 percent of children in Camden were receiving welfare benefits, and more than 25 percent of all households in the city received food stamps. With such benefits being widely distributed to help impoverished families feed their children at home, neither Christie nor Redd nor Rouhanifard explained why an after-school dinner program is necessary, unless the mothers of impoverished children are deemed incapable of using the proceeds of these programs to buy food and cook meals."
N.J. Gov. Chris Christie’s Costly Education Proposals
Written by Warren Mass
On January 23, during a visit to the Dudley Family School in Camden — a poverty-stricken city with a high school dropout rate — New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (shown) proposed several new school programs for his state’s schools. Among his proposals for six of Camden’s schools was an after-school dinner program, in which 75-125 students are already enrolled.
Christie made the announcement accompanied by Camden Mayor Dana Redd and Superintendent of Schools Paymon Rouhanifard.
“In Camden, we are beginning to see real progress on education issues from creating safety corridors to tackling the problem of high-school drop-outs. This new After School Dinner Pilot Program is another innovative way to ensure children have an opportunity for a nourishing meal, which is a critical element to improving student performance and achievement,” Christie was quoted by CBS News in Philadelphia.
The After School Dinner Pilot Program, run in partnership with food-service giant, Aramark, begins at 3:30 p.m. and ends by 4:00 p.m.
Mayor Redd said during the press conference, “The After School Dinner Pilot Program is a great initiative that will truly help many of our Camden families who are working hard to provide basic necessities for their children. I am confident that the success of the pilot program will eventually allow us to extend it citywide. I thank the Governor and Superintendent for their continued commitment and support to our Camden children and families.”
According to the 2007 publication Poverty in the City of Camden by the Poverty Benchmarks Project of Legal Services of New Jersey, “Nearly two out of every five adults between 18 and 64 years old [and 57 percent of the city’s children] lived below the federal poverty line in Camden ... in 2005.”
The report showed that in 2005, 57.2 percent of children in Camden were receiving welfare benefits, and more than 25 percent of all households in the city received food stamps.
With such benefits being widely distributed to help impoverished families feed their children at home, neither Christie nor Redd nor Rouhanifard explained why an after-school dinner program is necessary, unless the mothers of impoverished children are deemed incapable of using the proceeds of these programs to buy food and cook meals.
In his State of the State address on January 14, Christie offered his plan to improve the education of his state’s students: “And one key step is to lengthen the school day and the school year.”
Before suggesting the extended school calendar, Christie noted, “Last year, New Jersey’s high school graduation rate increased by a full percentage point, to 87.5%. Student achievement is strong in many of our public schools, and New Jersey’s students are among the country’s greatest achievers.”
The 18th annual Education Week “Quality Counts” report released this month, which “measures key education outcomes and provides ranks and grades for each state based on their commitment to improve educational policies and practices,” ranked New Jersey third in the nation, behind Massachusetts and Maryland. However, noted Christie, “Our per pupil expenditure is the highest in the nation at over $17,000 per year.” New Jersey spent nearly five percent of its taxable resources on K-12 schooling last year, second only to Vermont. The generous salary offered to New Jersey's teachers contributes to the high costs; New Jersey has the fifth highest average salary for teachers ($66,612) — and is first in pay for starting teachers as well ($48,101).
Despite all that expenditure and high ratings, statewide, New Jersey’s urban schools are still substandard. In Camden, for example, public schools spent $23,770 per student ($19,118 on a budgetary per-pupil basis) in the 2009–10 school year and only two-thirds of the students there manage to graduate from high school.
In his address, Christie cited improvements made in Newark and Camden (where, he noted, “last year, only three students graduated ‘college ready.’ ”) Christie then stated:
Despite the improvements we are seeing in Newark and Camden, I believe we need to take bigger and broader steps to adjust our approach to K-12 education to address the new competitive world we live in. Our school calendar is antiquated both educationally and culturally. Life in 2014 demands something more for our students. It is time to lengthen both the school day and school year in New Jersey....
So, working with Commissioner Cerf, I will present to you shortly a proposal to increase the length of both the school day and the school year in New Jersey. This is a key step to improve student outcomes and boost our competitiveness.
An article in the Star-Ledger (the largest circulated newspaper in New Jersey) reported mixed reaction to Christie’s proposal to expand the school schedules.
“Education is such a precious gift. It is the best thing that anybody can do for themselves so doing more of it has to be good,” the paper quoted Mount Olive Superintendent Larrie Reynolds. “I think it’s a great idea.”
New Jersey Education Association president Wendell Steinhauer said he welcomed the opportunity to discuss the “benefits and challenges of implementing an extended school day and school year.”
“That discussion must include educators and parents as well, to ensure that all concerns are taken into account and it should be based on research and evidence," Steinhauer said in a statement quoted by the Star-Ledger.
While the education professionals quoted tended to like the idea of a longer school schedule, they also expressed concern about the obvious impediment — cost.
State Senator Teresa Ruiz (D-Essex), chairwoman of the Senate Education Committee, said, “When we talk about improving education, we have to talk about extending the school day and the school year.” However, Ruiz added, “Funding is obviously the greatest question, but I think we can to it responsibly and collectively.”
Steinhauer also questioned the funding of the expanded-schedule plan, noting that the costs would include facility upgrades as well as personnel.
Few New Jersey schools are air conditioned, since the current 180-day school year typically runs from after Labor Day until early June. Expanding the schedule on either end would require cooling the schools, at great expense.
Another Star-Ledger article explored the potential cost of implementing Christie’s proposal. Among the findings:
The range of costs was broad. An elementary school in Arizona added 132 hours to the school year at a cost of $290 per student, while a school in Massachusetts added 540 hours at a cost of $1,695 a student. When calculated as cost per hour per student, the additional expenses ranged from $2.20 to $5.23.
Supposing, for example, that New Jersey added 300 hours to the school year (one extra hour for each of 180 days currently on the schedule, plus an extra month of four 30-hour weeks), and that costs in New Jersey would be similar to the school in Massachusetts, where the increase cost $3.14 per hour per student, we would see an increase in New Jersey of $942 per student annually. This would result in a per pupil expenditure (which the Federal Education Budget Project currently lists as $18,737 per year) of nearly $19,679 a year.
The obvious question is: Who will pay for this extra cost? Especially since Christie said in his State of the State address, “I will tell you one choice we will not make — because it is one answer that will not help grow our state: raising taxes.” How Gov. Christie intends to pay for this without raising taxes is not clear.
If taxes are raised, it could be problematic. New Jersey’s property taxes are already the highest in the nation, being nothing short of draconian. The Garden States in 2012 had mean property taxes of $7,318, with second-pace New Hampshire a distant second at $5,230. New Jersey is also first in property taxes paid compared to home value, at 1.89 percent, with New Hampshire second at 1.86 percent. (New Hampshire, however, has no broad sales tax or income tax.)
In an article entitled “By the Numbers: Analyzing New Jersey’s Tax and Budget Growth, published by NJSpotlight.com on May 7, 2012, we read:
School taxes, which grew from $7.3 billion in 2000 to an anticipated $13.7 billion this year, make up more than half of the total property tax bill — 52.4% to be exact….
The relative weight of school, municipal, and county property taxes varies widely from county to county, with school taxes often topping 60 percent of the property tax mix in suburban counties with low crime, while municipal taxes fall heavier in poorer cities, where state aid covers most school costs.
The cost of school taxes, then, averages over half of municipal taxes — mainly property taxes — and can be as high as 60 percent of the property tax in some New Jersey communities.
In short, considering the onerous property tax burden currently being shouldered by New Jersey’s homeowners, a tax increase to fund a longer school day and school year just might be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, accelerating the exodus of Garden State taxpayers to other states.
Link:
http://thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/17496-n-j-gov-chris-christie-s-costly-education-proposals
Written by Warren Mass
On January 23, during a visit to the Dudley Family School in Camden — a poverty-stricken city with a high school dropout rate — New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (shown) proposed several new school programs for his state’s schools. Among his proposals for six of Camden’s schools was an after-school dinner program, in which 75-125 students are already enrolled.
Christie made the announcement accompanied by Camden Mayor Dana Redd and Superintendent of Schools Paymon Rouhanifard.
“In Camden, we are beginning to see real progress on education issues from creating safety corridors to tackling the problem of high-school drop-outs. This new After School Dinner Pilot Program is another innovative way to ensure children have an opportunity for a nourishing meal, which is a critical element to improving student performance and achievement,” Christie was quoted by CBS News in Philadelphia.
The After School Dinner Pilot Program, run in partnership with food-service giant, Aramark, begins at 3:30 p.m. and ends by 4:00 p.m.
Mayor Redd said during the press conference, “The After School Dinner Pilot Program is a great initiative that will truly help many of our Camden families who are working hard to provide basic necessities for their children. I am confident that the success of the pilot program will eventually allow us to extend it citywide. I thank the Governor and Superintendent for their continued commitment and support to our Camden children and families.”
According to the 2007 publication Poverty in the City of Camden by the Poverty Benchmarks Project of Legal Services of New Jersey, “Nearly two out of every five adults between 18 and 64 years old [and 57 percent of the city’s children] lived below the federal poverty line in Camden ... in 2005.”
The report showed that in 2005, 57.2 percent of children in Camden were receiving welfare benefits, and more than 25 percent of all households in the city received food stamps.
With such benefits being widely distributed to help impoverished families feed their children at home, neither Christie nor Redd nor Rouhanifard explained why an after-school dinner program is necessary, unless the mothers of impoverished children are deemed incapable of using the proceeds of these programs to buy food and cook meals.
In his State of the State address on January 14, Christie offered his plan to improve the education of his state’s students: “And one key step is to lengthen the school day and the school year.”
Before suggesting the extended school calendar, Christie noted, “Last year, New Jersey’s high school graduation rate increased by a full percentage point, to 87.5%. Student achievement is strong in many of our public schools, and New Jersey’s students are among the country’s greatest achievers.”
The 18th annual Education Week “Quality Counts” report released this month, which “measures key education outcomes and provides ranks and grades for each state based on their commitment to improve educational policies and practices,” ranked New Jersey third in the nation, behind Massachusetts and Maryland. However, noted Christie, “Our per pupil expenditure is the highest in the nation at over $17,000 per year.” New Jersey spent nearly five percent of its taxable resources on K-12 schooling last year, second only to Vermont. The generous salary offered to New Jersey's teachers contributes to the high costs; New Jersey has the fifth highest average salary for teachers ($66,612) — and is first in pay for starting teachers as well ($48,101).
Despite all that expenditure and high ratings, statewide, New Jersey’s urban schools are still substandard. In Camden, for example, public schools spent $23,770 per student ($19,118 on a budgetary per-pupil basis) in the 2009–10 school year and only two-thirds of the students there manage to graduate from high school.
In his address, Christie cited improvements made in Newark and Camden (where, he noted, “last year, only three students graduated ‘college ready.’ ”) Christie then stated:
Despite the improvements we are seeing in Newark and Camden, I believe we need to take bigger and broader steps to adjust our approach to K-12 education to address the new competitive world we live in. Our school calendar is antiquated both educationally and culturally. Life in 2014 demands something more for our students. It is time to lengthen both the school day and school year in New Jersey....
So, working with Commissioner Cerf, I will present to you shortly a proposal to increase the length of both the school day and the school year in New Jersey. This is a key step to improve student outcomes and boost our competitiveness.
An article in the Star-Ledger (the largest circulated newspaper in New Jersey) reported mixed reaction to Christie’s proposal to expand the school schedules.
“Education is such a precious gift. It is the best thing that anybody can do for themselves so doing more of it has to be good,” the paper quoted Mount Olive Superintendent Larrie Reynolds. “I think it’s a great idea.”
New Jersey Education Association president Wendell Steinhauer said he welcomed the opportunity to discuss the “benefits and challenges of implementing an extended school day and school year.”
“That discussion must include educators and parents as well, to ensure that all concerns are taken into account and it should be based on research and evidence," Steinhauer said in a statement quoted by the Star-Ledger.
While the education professionals quoted tended to like the idea of a longer school schedule, they also expressed concern about the obvious impediment — cost.
State Senator Teresa Ruiz (D-Essex), chairwoman of the Senate Education Committee, said, “When we talk about improving education, we have to talk about extending the school day and the school year.” However, Ruiz added, “Funding is obviously the greatest question, but I think we can to it responsibly and collectively.”
Steinhauer also questioned the funding of the expanded-schedule plan, noting that the costs would include facility upgrades as well as personnel.
Few New Jersey schools are air conditioned, since the current 180-day school year typically runs from after Labor Day until early June. Expanding the schedule on either end would require cooling the schools, at great expense.
Another Star-Ledger article explored the potential cost of implementing Christie’s proposal. Among the findings:
The range of costs was broad. An elementary school in Arizona added 132 hours to the school year at a cost of $290 per student, while a school in Massachusetts added 540 hours at a cost of $1,695 a student. When calculated as cost per hour per student, the additional expenses ranged from $2.20 to $5.23.
Supposing, for example, that New Jersey added 300 hours to the school year (one extra hour for each of 180 days currently on the schedule, plus an extra month of four 30-hour weeks), and that costs in New Jersey would be similar to the school in Massachusetts, where the increase cost $3.14 per hour per student, we would see an increase in New Jersey of $942 per student annually. This would result in a per pupil expenditure (which the Federal Education Budget Project currently lists as $18,737 per year) of nearly $19,679 a year.
The obvious question is: Who will pay for this extra cost? Especially since Christie said in his State of the State address, “I will tell you one choice we will not make — because it is one answer that will not help grow our state: raising taxes.” How Gov. Christie intends to pay for this without raising taxes is not clear.
If taxes are raised, it could be problematic. New Jersey’s property taxes are already the highest in the nation, being nothing short of draconian. The Garden States in 2012 had mean property taxes of $7,318, with second-pace New Hampshire a distant second at $5,230. New Jersey is also first in property taxes paid compared to home value, at 1.89 percent, with New Hampshire second at 1.86 percent. (New Hampshire, however, has no broad sales tax or income tax.)
In an article entitled “By the Numbers: Analyzing New Jersey’s Tax and Budget Growth, published by NJSpotlight.com on May 7, 2012, we read:
School taxes, which grew from $7.3 billion in 2000 to an anticipated $13.7 billion this year, make up more than half of the total property tax bill — 52.4% to be exact….
The relative weight of school, municipal, and county property taxes varies widely from county to county, with school taxes often topping 60 percent of the property tax mix in suburban counties with low crime, while municipal taxes fall heavier in poorer cities, where state aid covers most school costs.
The cost of school taxes, then, averages over half of municipal taxes — mainly property taxes — and can be as high as 60 percent of the property tax in some New Jersey communities.
In short, considering the onerous property tax burden currently being shouldered by New Jersey’s homeowners, a tax increase to fund a longer school day and school year just might be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, accelerating the exodus of Garden State taxpayers to other states.
Link:
http://thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/17496-n-j-gov-chris-christie-s-costly-education-proposals
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)