All Statistics Are From The Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor StatisticsSeries Id: LNS13000000
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status: Unemployed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Series Id: LNS14000000
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
“…The FairTax is nonpartisan legislation (HR 25/S 296) that replaces all personal and corporate income taxes, all payroll taxes like Social Security and Medicare, estate, gift, capital gains, alternative minimum, and self-employment taxes with a progressive national sales tax. …”
I am an independent and my political philosophy is classical liberal or libertarian.
I want limited government and the FairTax.
I support and will vote for candidates for office who also want the FairTax to replace the existing Federal taxation system.
A growing number of Americans including Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, Tea Party Patriots and others want the FairTax.
Mike Huckabee – What is the “Fair Tax?”
Mike Gravel – On Fair Tax
Ron Paul on Taxes
The Fair Tax
Neal Boortz Explain the FAIRTAX
The FairTax is a national retail consumption tax that replaces most if not all Federal taxes and sends a prebate each month to every American to cover the taxes for the basic necessities of life.
The FairTax would replace existing Federal taxes including personal income taxes, payroll taxes, Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, capital gains taxes, alternative minimum taxes, corporate taxes, estate taxes and gift taxes with one national retail sales consumption tax on the purchase of new goods and services–the FairTax.
The Democratic Party has launched a last minute dirty tricks attack ad campaign, both onair (radio and television) and online (YouTube and paid ads on blogs including this one), to say that various Republican candidates that support tax reform and the FairTax want an additional 23% national sales taxes.
This is a lie and the Democratic Party and their desperate candidates know it.
Here are just a few examples that appeared on YouTube:
John Boozman: Excited About National Sales Tax
We Can’t Afford Millionaire Tim Burns and his 23% National Sales Tax
Sydney Hay: A New 23% Sales Tax (AZ-01)
Dan Benishek’s Bad Idea – 23% Tax on Nearly Everything You Buy
Mark McBride supports a 23% sales tax for Myrtle Beach
Andy Harris Doesn’t Have a Clue
Republican candidates who support the FairTax want to replace all Federal taxes with a broad-based consumption or retail sales tax on the purchase of new goods and services.
Yes, the rate would be 23%.
However, you would not be paying any of the above taxes and would be receiving a monthly prebate to pay the taxes on basic necessitates.
This means there would be no deductions from you payroll check for any Federal taxes.
Your gross pay would be the amount on your paycheck–there would be no Federal deductions.
Please visit the FairTax.org site for more information and a detailed response to the lies and distortions in the Democratic Party’s attack ads on the radio, television and in YouTube videos clips, web sites and blogs:
The American people know that the Democratic Party supported and passed in the House of Representatives the Cap and Trade bill that would have been the largest tax increase in American history had it been enacted into law.
The American people know that the Democratic Party wants an additional new tax, the Value Added Tax, if the Cap and Trade Energy Tax did not pass.
The American people know the Democratic Party wants to let the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 lapse at the end of 2010.
The American people know the Democratic Party wants all these new taxes to expand the size and scope of the Federal Government.
The American people know the Democratic Party wants to force you to buy a healthcare insurance plan or you must pay a tax fine or penalty.
The American people know the Democratic Party will never cut Federal Government spending, budget deficits, entitlements or the national debts.
The American people know the Democratic Party wants more spending, more deficits, more debts, and more taxes.
The important point to remember is the FairTax would replace all these other Federal taxes and would not be an additional tax on top of these existing taxes.
The FairTax provides a prebate or check to every American to pay for the taxes on basic necessities such as food and clothing.
Under the FairTax most Americans will pay less taxes than under the existing Federal tax system.
The Democratic Party is lying to the American people by not disclosing that the 23% sales tax would replace the current complicated Federal income, payroll, estate and gift taxation system.
The FairTax would also spur economic growth and create jobs.
Do not be fooled by the Democratic Party’s last-minute attack ad campaign to scare you and your family.
Do not vote for candidates, Democrats or Republicans, that would lie to you about taxes and spending.
When people lie to me, I do not trust them.
I do not do business with them and I certainly do not vote for them for public office.
The Democratic Party and those Democratic candidates who are using the FairTax’s 23% tax rate to attack their opponents have made a huge mistake.
The FairTax attack ads will incense and energize the political base of those in favor of tax reform that include Democrats, Republicans, Independents, libertarians, conservatives and the Tea Party Patriots.
After cutting Federal Government spending and repealing Obamacare, the reform of the Federal tax system and its replacement with either a flat income tax or the FairTax is very high priority of movement conservatives and libertarians.
By simply telling the truth, those who have been attacked in these ads will show that their Democratic opponents are both liars and hypocrites.
This does, however, require funds or campaign contributions to run the ads replying to attacks on radio and television.
Time for the Republican Party to step up to the plate and support the FairTax.
Will they do so?
Unfortunately they will not for the simple reason the Republican establishment supports the existing Federal income taxation system to attract campaign contributions from special interests that want changes in the tax code and regulations.
The major change the Republicans would support is a flat tax with one or two brackets.
Both the Democratic and Republican establishments fear the FairTax.
The American people need to support candidates who fully support the FairTax.
Please pass this information on to all FairTax supporters and your friends and neighbors.
Background Articles and Videos
More Boortz: When Democrats Attack the FairTax!
“…Here’s the cherry on the FairTax sundae. When the FairTax plan was being developed it was thought, and people in focus groups confirmed, that nobody should ever have to pay a penny of their earnings to government until they had first taken care of the needs of their family. What is the moral justification for allowing the government to seize a portion of your earnings before you’ve taken care of your family’s needs for the basic necessities of life? The designers of the FairTax were determined to find a solution to this problem, and came up with the “prebate.”
The government publishes Federal Poverty Guidelines every year. These figures are supposed to represent the amount that families of varying sizes would have to spend every year to meet their basic needs. The FairTax plan calls for every head of household in the country – legally in the country – to get a “prebate” at the beginning of each month equal to the amount of the FairTax that person will pay during the following month while purchasing those basic necessities. That poverty level for a family of four is $22,050. This equals $1,837.50 per month in spending, of which $423 would be FairTax. At the beginning of each month this head of household would receive a credit to his checking account, debit card or credit card in the amount of $423. This means that no citizen or legal resident of this country would ever pay one penny in tax to the federal government before his or her family needs were met. The prebate is what caused a focus group participant to blurt out “Well, that’s a fair tax!” Hence the name.
Are there downsides to the FairTax? Yes, as a matter of fact — one huge downside, if, that is, you’re a member of the political class. The FairTax would be the most massive transfer of power from government to the people since this country was founded. Politicians have this strange aversion to giving up power. Another problem is that, as Democrats are now illustrating, the FairTax is very easy to demagogue. If honesty isn’t your forte you can tell people that your opponent wants to add a 23 percent sales tax to everything you buy without including the pesky little details. As Politifac.com says: “Our bigger issue with the Lincoln ad – and a number of similar ads being run against Republicans who have had nice things to say about the “Fair Tax” – is that it highlights support for a 23 percent national sales tax but fails to mention that it would replace federal income taxes. No matter what you think of the plan, that’s a very deceptive omission.”
When you condense over 100,000 words from two books into one column of around 2000 words, much must remain unsaid. There’s the economic and jobs growth that would result from a system wherein people could do business without any tax component on capital and labor. There’s the $300 to $500 billion in annual tax compliance costs that would be eliminated. That’s just for starters.
If you want more information perhaps the two books mentioned at the beginning of this column might be a good place to start. There’s also a great deal of information at http://www.fairtax.org.
The midterms are approaching. Take some time to look behind the ads. …”
The Best Years of Our Lives — How Much Dissent Was There?
The Best Years of Our Lives – The Homecoming
William Wyler „The Best Years of Our Lives” (1946)
And for what? Conspiracy Theorists from the Past
Best Years of Our Lives – Al Stephenson Speech
The Best Years of our Lives
Background Articles and Videos
“…The Best Years of Our Lives is a 1946 American drama film about three servicemen trying to piece their lives back together after coming home from World War II. It won the 1946 Academy Award for Best Picture. It had one of the highest viewing figures of all time, with ticket sales exceeding $20.4 million.
Samuel Goldwyn was inspired to produce a film about veterans after reading an August 7, 1944 article in Time magazine about the difficulties experienced by men returning to civilian life. Goldwyn hired former war correspondent MacKinlay Kantor to write a screenplay. His work was first published as a novella, Glory for Me, which Kantor wrote in blank verse.
Robert Sherwood then adapted the novel as a screenplay. The film was directed by William Wyler, with cinematography by Gregg Toland. The film won seven Academy Awards, including those for best picture, director, actor, supporting actor, editing, screenplay, and original score.
In addition to its critical success, the film quickly became a great commercial success upon release. It became the highest grossing film in both the USA and UK since the release of Gone with the Wind. It remains the sixth most attended film of all time in the UK, with over 20 million tickets sold.
The ensemble cast includes Fredric March, Myrna Loy, Dana Andrews, Teresa Wright, Virginia Mayo, and Hoagy Carmichael. It also features Harold Russell, a U.S. paratrooper who had lost both hands in a training accident.
After World War II, demobilized servicemen Fred Derry (Dana Andrews), Homer Parrish (Harold Russell), and Al Stephenson (Frederic March) meet while hitching a ride home in a bomber to Boone City, a fictional Midwestern city, patterned after Cincinnati, Ohio. Fred was a decorated Army Air Forces captain and bombardier with the Eighth Air Force in Europe, who still suffers from nightmares of combat. Homer had been in the Navy, where he lost both hands from burns suffered when his aircraft carrier was sunk. For replacements, he has mechanical hook prostheses (as Harold Russell had, so no artifice was required). Al served as an infantry platoon sergeant in the 25th Infantry Division, fighting in the Pacific.
Prior to the war, Al had worked as a bank executive and loan officer for the Corn Belt Savings and Loan in Boone City. He is a mature man with a loving family and comfortable home: his patient wife Milly (Myrna Loy), adult daughter Peggy (Teresa Wright) and college freshman son Rob. Al now is having trouble readjusting to civilian life, as do his two chance acquaintances, and he is showing signs of alcoholism.
The bank, anticipating an increase in loans to returning war veterans, promotes Al to Vice President in charge of the small loan department because of his war experience. However, after he approves a chancy loan to a veteran, Al’s boss Mr. Milton advises him not to gamble on further loans without collateral. At his welcome-home dinner, a slightly drunk Al gives a stirring speech, acknowledging that people will think that the bank is gambling with the depositors’ money if he has his way, “And they’ll be right; we’ll be gambling on the future of this country!” Mr. Milton applauds his sentiments, but Al remarks later, “He’ll back me up wholeheartedly until the next time I help some little guy, then I’ll have to fight it out again.”
Homer playing piano. Note the in-focus figure of Fred in the phone booth in the background, while maintaining clear focus on Homer, Butch and Al.
Before the war, Fred had been an unskilled drugstore soda jerk, having been raised in a poor neighborhood. He does not want to return to his old job, but has no choice, given the stiff competition from other returning veterans and his lack of civilian skills. He had met Marie (Virginia Mayo) while in training and married her shortly afterward, before shipping out less than a month later. She took a job as a night club waitress and set up her own apartment while Fred was overseas. She does not relish being married to a soda jerk and seemed more attracted to Fred as an officer.
Peggy meets Fred after coming home with her father Al following an alcohol-fueled “reunion” at a local watering hole owned by Homer’s uncle, Butch (Hoagy Carmichael). The relationship between Peggy and Fred begins slowly, but there is a mutual attraction almost from the start. After a double-date with Fred and Marie, Peggy is contemptuous of Marie, believing she is shallow. Peggy tells her parents she intends to break up Fred and Marie’s marriage, only to be told that their own marriage overcame similar problems. To protect Peggy, Al pressures Fred to break off all contact with his daughter. Fred does so, but the friendship between the two men is strained almost to the breaking point.
Homer was a football quarterback before the war. Before leaving to fight, he had become engaged to Wilma (Cathy O’Donnell). When he returns, both Homer and his parents have trouble dealing with his disability. He does not want to burden Wilma with a handicapped man, so he pushes her away, although she adjusts best to his changed life. His uncle Butch owns a bar where the three men meet from time to time. Butch counsels Homer, but refrains from telling his nephew what to do.
At the drugstore where Fred works, an obnoxious customer, who says that the war was fought against the wrong enemies, gets into an altercation with Homer. After Fred punches the troublemaker, he loses his job. One day when Fred returns home from collecting his unemployment check and job hunting, he discovers his wife with another man (Steve Cochran in an early role as another veteran). Marie exclaims:
I gave up the best years of my life, and what have you done? You flopped! Couldn’t even hold that job at the drugstore. So I’m going back to work for myself and that means I’m gonna live for myself too. And in case you don’t understand English, I’m gonna get a divorce.
Fred decides to leave town, and goes to his father’s house to say goodbye. He gives his father, Pat Derry, his medals and citations, saying dismissively that they were “passed out with the k-rations.” After he leaves, his father reads aloud the citation for Fred’s Distinguished Flying Cross citation. For the first time, he learns of his son’s extraordinary heroism.
Arriving at the airport, Fred books space on the first outbound transport, not caring about the destination. While waiting departure, Fred walks around the airport to kill time and wanders into a vast wartime aircraft “boneyard”. Climbing into the nose of a B-17 Flying Fortress, he begins to relive intense memories of combat. The boss of a work crew interrupts him. Fred had thought of the aircraft as unwanted debris to be thrown away, like him. When the crew chief says the aluminum is being salvaged to build housing, Fred talks him into a job.
Wilma tells Homer that her family wants her to go away, since it seems that he will not marry her. He bluntly demonstrates how hard life with him would be, but she is unfazed. When she makes it clear that she loves him anyway, he gives in.
Now divorced, Fred is Homer’s best man at the wedding. He greets Peggy formally, but they exchange meaningful looks throughout the ceremony. As the guests gather to congratulate Homer and Wilma, Fred approaches Peggy and holds her. He says that their life together will be a hard struggle, and it might be years before they can get ahead. She smiles despite his words and they embrace. …”
‘…Awards and honors
1947 Academy Awards
The film received seven Academy Awards. Fredric March won his second Best Actor award (after winning in 1932 for Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde). (Dana Andrews’ brilliant performance turned out to be overshadowed by the acclaim Fredric March and Harold Russell received.)
Despite his Oscar-nominated performance, Harold Russell was not a professional actor. As the Academy Board of Governors considered him a long shot to win, they gave him an honorary award “for bringing hope and courage to his fellow veterans through his appearance”. When Russell won Best Supporting Actor, there was an enthusiastic response. He is the only actor to have received two Academy Awards for the same performance. He later sold one of the awards for $50,000, first claiming it was to pay his wife’s medical bills. Later he said it was to pay for a cruise for her. He often joked, “I can pick up anything but the check!”
Issue number 3 is Obamacare– the American people want it repealed as soon as possible and no money bills or appropriations to fund Obamacare.
Fight Obamacare Texas
Issue number 4 is illegal immigration–the American people want it stopped by immigration law enforcement and a completed border fence that is heavily patrolled.
What Are True Costs And Benefits Of Illegal Immigration?
Stop Illegal Immigration
The American people expect the Republican Party to balance the Federal Budget by significantly reducing Government spending and permanently closing Federal Departments including Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Renewal, Interior, Labor, and Transportation.
The number of Federal employees should be cut from over 2,000,000 to less than 1,000,000.
3 Reasons Public Sector Employees are Killing the Economy
The American people expect the Republican Party to make the Bush tax cuts permanent for all taxpayers and pass the FairTax–it is time!
The FairTax: It’s Time
Should the Republican Party fail to balance the budget and cut the size and scope of the Federal Government by permanently shutting down the above departments, these Republicans will be wiped out by the 2012 wave of tea party patriots.
Background Articles and Videos
Editor in Chief Insights: Obama’s Job Approval Trajectory
President Obama Heads into Midterms at Lowest Approval Rating of Presidency
Two-thirds of Americans believe country going off on the wrong track
“…Currently, two-thirds of Americans (67%) have a negative opinion of the job President Obama is doing while just over one-third (37%) have a positive opinion. This continues the president’s downward trend and he is now at the lowest job approval rating of his presidency.
These are some of the results of The Harris Poll of 3,084 adults surveyed online between October 11 and 18, 2010 by Harris Interactive.
It’s perhaps not surprising that nine in ten Republicans (90%) and Conservatives (89%) give the job the president is doing negative ratings. What may be surprising is that one-third of Democrats (34%) and Liberals (33%) also give him negative ratings, as do seven in ten Independents (70%) and six in ten Moderates (60%).
Americans who give the president the highest positive ratings are those with a post-graduate education (48%), a college education (47%), and those living in the West (42%). On the other end of the spectrum, almost three-quarters of those with a high school education or less (72%) and two-thirds of Midwesterners (66%) and Southerners (66%) give the President negative marks on his overall job.
While the president is at a low point, there is a political body with ratings much lower than his. Just one in ten Americans (11%) give Congress positive ratings on the job they are doing while nine in ten (89%) give them negative marks. While Congress may be under Democratic control, even four in five Democrats (81%) give them negative ratings.
Part of this negativity may have to do with the way Americans believe the country as a whole is going. Just one-third of U.S. adults (34%) say the country is going in the right direction while two-thirds (66%) say it is going off on the wrong track. While not close to the low it was before the 2008 election (11% said things were going in the right direction), this is one of the lower points of this year. …”
Voters Trust Republicans More on Eight of 10 Key Issues
“…Voters now trust Democrats over Republicans in only two areas – government ethics and corruption by a 41% to 36% margin and education where Democrats have a slight 42% to 40% edge.
The economy continues to be the most important issue on voters’ minds this election, and 49% place their trust in Republicans to handle this issue. Thirty-nine percent (39%) trust Democrats more. These findings show little change from early June 2009.
On the issue of health care, which voters place second on the list of important issues, Republicans hold a modest 47% to 40% advantage. Democrats were trusted more on this issue until the debate over a proposed national health care bill began to heat up in early September of last year.
Most voters continue to favor repeal of the national health care law, but the number of voters who expect the law to increase the deficit has fallen to the lowest point since its passage by Congress in March.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
Two surveys of 1,000 Likely U.S. Voters each were conducted October 12-13 and October 14-15, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Government ethics and corruption rate number three in terms of overall importance, but voters have been narrowly divided for the past several months over which party to trust more on this issue. Democrats have held small leads since February.
As for education, both parties have held very modest leads on the issue at different times for months now.
Forty-eight percent (48%) of voters nationwide place their trust in the hands of Republicans when it comes to the issue of taxes. Thirty-nine percent (39%) would rather the Democrats handle this issue. The GOP has held a solid lead over Democrats on this issue since early July 2009.
But most voters believe that Democrats in Congress want to raise taxes and spending, while Republicans in Congress want to cut taxes and spending.
When it comes to immigration, 45% trust Republicans, while 33% trust the Democrats more. The gap between the two parties has widened since the beginning of January as the debate over the immigration law in Arizona intensified. At the beginning of the year, voters were essentially evenly divided on which party to trust.
Voters feel more strongly than ever that the federal government is encouraging illegal immigration and that states like Arizona have the answer to the problem, but the Obama administration is challenging the Arizona law in federal court.
Republicans continue to be trusted more on national security issues and the war on terror, with 49% of voters trusting the GOP versus 39% who trust the Democrats more. When it comes the war in Afghanistan, Republicans hold a six-point advantage, 42% to 36%.
Similarly, voters trust Republicans more than Democrats to handle the war in Iraq, 43% to 37%. …”
“..Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position.
As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda, in its most basic sense, presents information primarily to influence an audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus possibly lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or uses loaded messages to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the attitude toward the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda. Propaganda can be used as a form of political warfare.
While the term propaganda has acquired a strongly negative connotation by association with its most manipulative and jingoistic examples, propaganda in its original sense is neutral, and may also be construed to refer to uses which are generally held to be relatively benign or innocuous, such as public health recommendations, signs encouraging citizens to participate in a census or election, or messages encouraging persons to report crimes to the police, among others. …”
“…Home is a 2009 documentary by Yann Arthus-Bertrand. The film is almost entirely composed of aerial shots of various places on Earth. It shows the diversity of life on Earth and how humanity is threatening the ecological balance of the planet. The movie was released simultaneously on June 5, 2009 in cinemas across the globe, on DVD, Blu-ray, television, and on YouTube, opening in 181 countries.
The film was financed by PPR, a French multinational holding company specializing in retail shops and luxury brands, as part of their PR strategy.
The documentary chronicles the present day state of the Earth, its climate and how we as the dominant species have long-term repercussions on its future. A theme expressed throughout the documentary is that of linkage—how all organisms and the Earth are linked in a “delicate but crucial” natural balance with each other, and how no organism can be self-sufficient.
The first 15 minutes include footage of the beginning of the natural world, starting with single-celled algae developing at the edges of volcanic springs. By showing algae’s essential role in the evolution of photosynthesis, it also explores the innumerable species of plants which all have their origins in this one-celled life form.
In the rest of the first hour of the film, the documentary takes on a more human-oriented focus, showing the agricultural revolution and its impacts, before moving on to talk about the harnessing of oil, leading to fire, industry, cities and inequality gaps like never before. It portrays the current predicament regarding cattle ranches, deforestation, food and water shortages, the use of non-renewable “fossil water”, the over-quarrying crisis and the shortage of energy, namely electricity. Cities such as New York City, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Shenzhen, Mumbai, Tokyo and Dubai are used as examples of the mismanagement and wastage of energy, water and food. The recession of marshlands and glaciers are shown in vast aerial shots of Antarctica, The North Pole and Africa, while mass emigration and refugee counts are shown currently and forecast in the event that these events remains unchanged.
It is at this point that the film begins to focus on global warming and the carbon crisis. Home shows how melting glaciers, rising sea levels and changing weather patterns are ravaging the people who have least to do with climate change, but also how it soon will affect rich populous areas.
Here, about three minutes of film is given to displaying harsh facts in large white text on a black background followed by a video representation of the fact. This is followed by a positive conclusion. The documentary claims to show the “awful truths” regarding our impact on the Earth, but also what we are now doing to combat and reverse it: including renewable energy, the creation of more and more national parks, international co-operation between various nations on environmental issues and the extra education and reform being had across the globe in response to the current problems facing the earth.
A Cineflex camera used in the filming of Home
Home was filmed in various stages due to the expanse of the areas portrayed. Taking over eighteen months to complete, director Yann Arthus-Bertrand and a camera man, a camera engineer and a pilot flew in a small helicopter through various regions in over fifty countries. The filming was done using high-definition “Cineflex” cameras which were suspended from a gyro-stabilized sphere from rails on the base of the helicopter. These cameras, originally manufactured for army firing equipment, reduce vibrations helping to capture smooth images, which appear as if they had been filmed from crane arms or dollies. After almost every flight, recordings were immediately checked to ensure they were usable. After filming was complete, Besson and his crew had over 488 hours of footage to edit from.[4
Distribution and promotion
To promote the documentary online, a YouTube channel known as “HomeProject” was created. Uploaded to this were various short clips of filming which took place in different parts of the world including the Arctic Circle, Africa and the large metropolises featured.
On March 9, 2009, a press-conference was held in Paris, France, where Yann Arthus-Bertrand and various producers talked to the media about the issues raised in the film, as well as confirming that Home would be the first film ever to be simultaneously released in theaters, on television, on DVD and on the Internet in five continents.
On May 5, 2009, a second press-conference was held again in Paris, where the same crew members announced that the film’s release date would be June 5, 2009, World Environment Day. Here, they also announced that Home would be 100% free for everyone to view, as “The benefits of this film cannot be counted in dollars, but in audience figures.” They also revealed that PPR was going to sponsor the film in order to facilitate unavoidable costs.
The film, which was available for free release until June 14, has been broadcast in 14 languages. The Blu-ray edition was released by 20th Century Fox and features both the English and French versions. It is expected to sell in excess of 100,000 copies. When production costs are met, all proceeds sale takings will go to the Good Planet Company.
“…We make three propositions concerning what we believe to be institutions that are run as “control frauds”. To date, this situation has been ignored in the policy debates about how to respond to the crisis. The propositions rest on a firm (but ignored) empirical and theoretical foundation developed and confirmed by white-collar criminologists, economists, and effective financial regulators. The key facts are that there was massive fraud by nonprime lenders and packagers of fraudulent nonprime loans at the direction of their controlling officers. By “massive” we mean that lenders made millions of fraudulent loans annually and that packagers turned most of these fraudulent loans into fraudulent securities. These fraudulent loans and securities made the senior officers (and corrupted professionals that blessed their frauds) rich, hyper-inflated the bubble, devastated millions of working class borrowers and middle class home owners, and contributed significantly to the Great Recession — by far the worst economic collapse since the 1930s.
Our first proposition is this: The entities that made and securitized large numbers of fraudulent loans must be sanctioned before they produce the next, larger crisis. Second: The officers and professionals that directed, participated in, and profited from the frauds should be sanctioned before they cause the next crisis. Third: The lenders, officers, and professional that directed, participated in, and profited from the fraudulent loans and securities should be prevented from causing further damage to the victims of their frauds, e.g., through fraudulent foreclosures. Foreclosure fraud is an inevitable consequence of the underlying “epidemic” of mortgage fraud by nonprime lenders, not a new, unrelated epidemic of fraud by mortgage servicers with flawed processes. We propose a policy response designed to achieve these propositions.
S&L regulators, criminologists, and economists recognize that the same recipe that produced guaranteed, record (fictional) accounting income (and executive compensation) until 2007 produced another guarantee: massive (real) losses, particularly if the frauds hyper-inflated a bubble. CEOs who loot “their” banks do so by perverting the bank into a wealth destroying monster — a control fraud. What could be worse than deliberately growing massively by making loans likely to default, converting large amounts of bank assets to the personal benefit of the senior officers looting the bank and to those the CEO suborns to assist his looting (appraisers, auditors, attorneys, economists, rating agencies, and politicians), while simultaneously providing minimal capital (extreme leverage) and only grossly inadequate loss reserves, and causing bubbles to hyper-inflate?
This nation’s most elite bankers originated and packaged fraudulent nonprime loans that destroyed wealth — and working class families’ savings — at a prodigious rate never seen before in the history of white-collar crime. They created the worst bubble in financial history, echo epidemics of fraud among elite professionals, loan brokers, and loan servicers, and would (if left to their own devices) have caused the Second Great Depression.
Nothing short of removing all senior officers who directed, committed, or acquiesced in fraud can be effective against control fraud. We repeat: Foreclosure fraud is the necessary outcome of the epidemic of mortgage fraud that began early this decade. The banks that are foreclosing on fraudulently originated mortgages frequently cannot produce legitimate documents and have committed “fraud in the inducement.” Now, only fraud will let them take the homes. Many of the required documents do not exist, and those that do exist would provide proof of the fraud that was involved in loan origination, securitization, and marketing. This in turn would allow investors to force the banks to buy-back the fraudulent securities. In other words, to keep the investors at bay the foreclosing banks must manufacture fake documents. If the original documents do not exist the securities might be ruled no good. If the original docs do exist they will demonstrate that proper underwriting was not done — so the securities might be no good. Foreclosure fraud is the only thing standing between the banks and Armageddon. …”
“…Who is Guilty? Let us deal with the “borrower fraud” argument first because it is the area containing the most erroneous assumptions. There was fraud at every step in the home finance food chain: the appraisers were paid to overvalue real estate; mortgage brokers were paid to induce borrowers to accept loan terms they could not possibly afford; loan applications overstated the borrowers’ incomes; speculators lied when they claimed that six different homes were their principal dwelling; mortgage securitizers made false reps and warranties about the quality of the packaged loans; credit ratings agencies were overpaid to overrate the securities sold on to investors; and investment banks stuffed collateralized debt obligations with toxic securities that were handpicked by hedge fund managers to ensure they would self destruct.That homeowners would default on the nonprime mortgages was a foregone conclusion throughout the industry — indeed, it was the desired outcome. This was something the lending side knew, but which few on the borrowing side could have realized.The homeowners were typically fraudulently induced by the lenders and the lenders’ agents (the loan brokers) to enter into nonprime mortgages. The lenders knew the “loan to value” (LTV) ratios and income to debt ratios that they wanted the borrower to (appear to) meet in order to make it possible for the lender to sell the nonprime loan at a premium. LTV can be gimmicked by inflating the appraisal. The debt to income ratios can be gimmicked by inflating income. “Liar’s” loan lenders used that loan format because it allowed the lender to simultaneously loan to a vast number of borrowers that could not repay their home loans, at a premium yield, while making it look to the purchaser of the loan that it was relatively low risk. Liar’s loans maximized the lender’s reported income, which maximized the CEO’s compensation.The problem is that only the most sophisticated nonprime borrowers (the speculators who bought six homes) (1) knew the key ratios they had to appear to meet, (2) had the ability to induce an appraiser to inflate substantially the reported market value of the home, and (3) knew how to create false financial information that was internally consistent and credible. The solution was for the lender and the lender’s agents to (1) instruct the borrower to report a certain income or even to fill out the application with false information, (2) suborn an appraiser to provide the necessary inflated market value, and (3) create fraudulent financial information that had at least minimal coherence.When the overburdened homeowner began missing payments, late fees and higher interest rates kicked-in, boosting the stated income of mortgage servicers and the value of the securities. Not coincidentally, the biggest banks own the servicers and could maximize claims against the mortgages by running up the late fees. It was quite convenient to “misplace” mortgage payments, so even homeowners who were never delinquent could get hit with fees and higher rates. And when payments were received, the servicers would (illegally) apply them first to the late fees, meaning the homeowners were unknowingly still missing mortgage payments. The foreclosure process itself generates big fees for the SDI banks.And, miracle of miracles, the banks would end up with the homes and get to restart the whole process again — from resale of the home through the financing, securitizing, and fee-for-servicing juggernaut. …”
Foreclosure-Gate Fallout: How Bad Can It Get For Wall Street?
“…JPMorgan Chase loves using its research department to push its political agenda, and the bank is currently characterizing the foreclosure fraud outbreak as a set of “process-oriented problems that can be fixed.” That puts them in the rosy optimist camp for this crisis, and they’re projecting a total of $55 billion to $120 billion in losses for the entire industry, spread out over a few years.
But take a look at the analysts’ methodology. The actual scope of losses gets drastically larger if you just change a few arbitrary assumptions.
JPMorgan’s analysts look at about $6 trillion in mortgages issued between 2005 and 2007 — this is the height of the bubble, but it excludes plenty of lousy loans issued in 2003, 2004 and 2008. They then estimate defaults of $2 trillion and losses of $1.1 trillion on those defaults.
So far, these estimates are reasonable. According to Valparaiso University Law School Professor Alan White, banks lose about 58 percent of the value of a subprime loan at foreclosure. JPMorgan is estimating 55 percent. The notion that one-third of mortgages issued at the height of the bubble will default may seem extreme, but the analysis includes both first-lien mortgages and second-lien mortgages (home-equity loans). For houses with multiple mortgages, there’s going to be a double-hit when the first lien goes bad. Right now, the official statistics from Mortgage Bankers Association indicate that 14 percent of first mortgages are delinquent or in foreclosure. The longer unemployment stays near 10 percent, the higher that figure will go. …”
“…Anthropology also instills a sense of skepticism about official rhetoric. In Most societies, elites try to maintain a sense of skepticism about official rhetoric. In most societies, elites try to maintain their power not simply by garnering wealth, but also by dominating the mainstream ideologies, in terms of both what is said and what is not discussed. Social “silences” serve to maintain power structures, in ways that participants often barely understand themselves let alone plan.
That set ideas might sound excessively abstract (or hippie). But they would seem to be sorely needed now. In recent years, regulators, bankers, politicians, investors, and journalists have failed to employ truly holistic thought–to our collective cost. …”
~Gillian Tett, Fool’s Gold, page 251
Book TV: Gillian Tett, “Fools Gold”
Gillian Tett Keynote Remarks at CED Economic Summit (Part 1)
Gillian Tett Keynote Remarks at CED Economic Summit (Part 2)
Gillian Tett Keynote Remarks at CED Economic Summit (Part 3)
“Derivatives: ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ or Generators of Market Stability?”
Gillian Tett on risk
“Now, however, it is clear that this lack of holistic thought and debate has had devastating consequences. Regulators have realized, too late, that they were wrong to place so much blind faith in the creed of risk dispersion. Bank executives have been confronted with vast losses created by dysfunctional internal silos. Politicians are facing fiscal crisis as an economic boom crumbles to dust. Most tragic of all, millions of ordinary families, who never even knew that CDOs existed, far less dealt with them, have suffered shattering financial blows. They are understandably angry. So am I. It is a terrible, damning indictment of how twenty-first-century Western society works.”
~Gillian Tett, Fool’s Gold, page 252
Background Articles and Video
The Boom & Bust Years P1
The Boom & Bust Years P2
The Boom & Bust Years P3
The Boom & Bust Years P4
The Boom & Bust Years P5
The Boom & Bust Years P6
Book TV: Sebastian Mallaby, “More Money than God”
Newsnight – 1of2 – (20100526) Sovereign default piece
Newsnight – 2of2 – (20100526) Panel Discussion
“…Gillian Tett is a British author and award-winning journalist at the Financial Times, where she is an assistant editor overseeing the FT’s global financial markets coverage. The Financial Times on March 1, 2010, announced the appointment of Gillian Tett as U.S. managing editor. She has written about the financial instruments that were part of the cause of the financial crisis that started in the fourth quarter of 2007, such as CDOs, credit default swaps, SIVs, conduits, and SPVs.
Following a Ph.D. in social anthropology at Clare College, Cambridge based on field research in the former Soviet Union, Tett moved to a career in journalism while doing fieldwork in Soviet-influenced Central Asia and joined the Financial Times in 1993. She worked in the former Soviet Union and in Europe and was posted to Tokyo in 1997, where she later became bureau chief.
In 2003 Tett became deputy head of the influential Lex column. In 2010 The Huffington Post asked “Is Gillian Tett The Most Powerful Woman in Newspapers?”
Tett predicted the financial crisis in 2006. Her 2009 book Fool’s Gold: How Unrestrained Greed Corrupted a Dream, Shattered Global Markets and Unleashed a Catastrophe was widely reviewed throughout the English-speaking world and won the Spear’s Book Award for the financial book of 2009. …”
2007 Wincott prize for financial journalism (capital markets coverage)
2009 Journalist of the Year (British Press Awards)
2009 Financial Book of the Year (for her book Fool’s Gold)
Fool’s Gold: How Unrestrained Greed Corrupted a Dream, Shattered Global Markets and Unleashed a CatastropheISBN 978-1408701645 (in some markets called Fool’s Gold: How the Bold Dreams of a Small Tribe at J.P Morgan Was Corrupted by Wall Street Greed and Unleashed a CatastropheISBN 978-1416598572)
Saving the Sun: How Wall Street Mavericks Shook Up Japan’s Financial World and Made Billions (ISBN 978-0060554255).
“…The publicity is all part of a months-long coming-out party here in the States for Tett, whose early outing of the credit-derivatives pyramid scheme that crippled the global financial markets has given her something of a celebrity moment. Or at least as much of a celebrity moment as a financial journalist can have. The horrible financial climate has been great for Tett, who has given the FT the authoritative voice documentating the global economic meltdown, while her camera-ready looks have made her the go-to journalist for television outlets across the globe. In ascending to the highest U.S. editorial position at the Financial Times, Tett has managed to make the august, salmon-hued broadsheet two things never identified with it before: trendy and sexy.
“You have to understand money to understand the world.”
“The FT has become a sort of status symbol, people want to show off that they read it,” says Reed Phillips, managing partner of boutique media advisory firm DeSilva & Phillips. “They’d rather leave the FT out on the coffee table than The Wall Street Journal.”
“Status symbol” isn’t a word recently associated with the newspaper industry, but the FT has been an anomaly. Long thought of as a British newspaper, the FT has quadrupled its circulation in the U.S. to 137,000 and now has more readers stateside than it does in the U.K. (worldwide circulation: 401,000). Meanwhile, its website boasts 2 million registered users, and 126,000 people pay for subscription services—digital products accounted for 73 percent of the FT Group’s revenue last year, while advertising only accounted for 19 percent, a near reversal from a decade ago that underscores a desire among all media organizations to be less reliant on advertising. …”
“The surest way to destroy a nation is to debauch its currency.”
~Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
“Inflation is running at rates that are too low.”
~Ben Bernanke, Chairman of The Federal Reserve System
“The gold standard has one tremendous virtue: the quantity of the money supply, under the gold standard, is independent of the policies of governments and political parties. This is its advantage. It is a form of protection against spendthrift governments.”
“The gold standard did not collapse. Governments abolished it in order to pave the way for inflation. The whole grim apparatus of oppression and coercion, policemen, customs guards, penal courts, prisons, in some countries even executioners, had to be put into action in order to destroy the gold standard.”
~Ludwig von Mises
Pulp Fiction – You’re The Weak – Extended Version
Jules: Well there’s this passage I got memorized. Ezekiel 25:17. “The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.” I been sayin’ that shit for years. And if you ever heard it, it meant your ass. I never gave much thought what it meant. I just thought it was some cold-blooded shit to say to a motherfucker before I popped a cap in his ass. I saw some shit this mornin’ made me think twice. See now I’m thinkin’, maybe it means you’re the evil man. And I’m the righteous man. And Mr. 9 Milimeter here, he’s the shepherd protecting my righteous ass in the valley of darkness. Or it could mean you’re the righteous man and I’m the shepherd and it’s the world that’s evil and selfish. Now I’d like that. But that shit ain’t the truth. The truth is you’re the weak. And I’m the tyranny of evil men. But I’m tryin’, Ringo. I’m tryin’ real hard to be a shepherd.
Pulp Fiction written by Quentin Tarantino & Roger Avary
The Dollar is now collapsing – Peter Schiff | Part 1
The Dollar is now collapsing – Peter Schiff | Part 2
The Dollar is now collapsing – Peter Schiff | Part 3
Peter Schiff: Deflation vs. Inflation Argument on FSN
Inflation or Deflation?
Irwin Stelzer on Inflation vs Deflation
Inflation or Deflation?
What is Inflation or Deflation?
Highlights of Marc Faber and Deflation
NBR | Japan Deflation | PBS
NBR | Food Prices Could Signal Deflation Ahead | PBS
Inflation Deflation Debate Rages On: 2010 Economic Collapse
Hyperinflation Nation Part 1/3
Hyperinflation Nation Part 2/3
Hyperinflation Nation Part 3/3
The Boom & Bust Years P1
The Boom & Bust Years P2
The Boom & Bust Years P3
The Boom & Bust Years P4
The Boom & Bust Years P5
The Boom & Bust Years P6
Fall of the Republic HQ full length version
Fall Of The Republic 1/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 2/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 3/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 4/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 5/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 6/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 7/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 8/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 9/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 10/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 11/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 12/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 13/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Fall Of The Republic 14/14: The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
“Capitalism means free enterprise, sovereignty of the consumers in economic matters, and sovereignty of the voters in political matters. Socialism means full government control of every sphere of the individuals life and the unrestricted supremacy of the government in its capacity as central board of production management.”
“A man who chooses between drinking a glass of milk and a glass of a solution of potassium cyanide does not choose between two beverages; he chooses between life and death. A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings.”
“There is simply no other choice than this: either to abstain from interference in the free play of the market, or to delegate the entire management of production and distribution to the government. Either capitalism or socialism: there exists no middle way.”
Inflation and Debt: The Interaction of Fiscal and Monetary Policy (Part 1)
Inflation and Debt: The Interaction of Fiscal and Monetary Policy (Part 2)
Inflation and Debt: The Interaction of Fiscal and Monetary Policy (Part 3)
Inflation and Debt: The Interaction of Fiscal and Monetary Policy (Part 4)
Inflation and Debt: The Interaction of Fiscal and Monetary Policy (Part 5)
Inflation and Debt: The Interaction of Fiscal and Monetary Policy (Part 6)
Inflation and Debt: The Interaction of Fiscal and Monetary Policy (Part 7)
Richard W. Fisher Speech: Historical Perspectives on the Current Financial Crisis (Part 1)
(Part 2) Richard W. Fisher Speech: Historical Perspectives on the Current Financial Crisis
(Part 3) Richard W. Fisher Speech: Historical Perspectives on the Current Financial Crisis
“…Peter David Schiff (pronounced /ˈʃɪf/; born March 23, 1963) is an American businessman, author, financial commentator, and a former 2010 Republican primary candidate for the United States Senate.
Schiff is president and chief global strategist of Euro Pacific Capital Inc., a broker-dealer based in Westport, Connecticut. Schiff frequently appears as a guest on CNBC, Fox News, and Bloomberg Television and is often quoted in major financial publications and is a frequent guest on internet radio as well as the former host of the podcast Wall Street Unspun and the current host of the The Peter Schiff Show.
He is known for his bearish views on the dollar and dollar denominated assets, while bullish on investment in tangible assets, as well as foreign stocks and currencies.
Schiff began his career as a financial consultant at a Shearson Lehman Brothers brokerage. In 1996 Schiff and a partner acquired a small brokerage firm that had been founded in 1980, reincorporated it in California and renamed it Euro Pacific Capital. The company today has more than 15,000 clients and six offices nationwide, with its headquarters in Westport, Connecticut.
According to a 2005 article in The Advocate of Stamford, Connecticut Schiff relocated the firm to Darien, Connecticut to find brokers “who think like him”. The New York Metropolitan Area, Schiff says, has the biggest concentration of brokers in the country, making it easier to recruit employees. The company has offices in Newport Beach, California as well as in Scottsdale, Arizona, Palm Beach, Florida, Los Angeles and New York. Euro Pacific Capital also holds the exclusive rights to broker some Perth Mint gold products in the United States.
Schiff attributes his economic forecasts to an understanding of the Austrian School, a school of economic thought generally categorized as heterodox (or non-mainstream). Schiff voices strong support for the Austrian School, and says it was first introduced to him by his father, Irwin Schiff. Schiff admits his economic views are not mainstream, and like the Austrian School, he makes judgments without a strict adherence to economic statistics.
U.S. bear market
In his 2007 book, Crash Proof, Schiff writes that the current United States economic policies are fundamentally unsound, and predicts that in the future the United States dollar will lose much of its value.
Schiff feels that the imbalance between the amount of goods the U.S. consumes and what it produces will eventually lead to problems for the U.S. economy. As a remedy Schiff favors increased personal savings and production which he says will stimulate economic growth. Schiff cites the U.S.’s low personal savings rate as one of the causes of the its transformation from the world’s largest creditor nation in the 1970s to the largest debtor nation in the year 2000. Schiff attributes the low savings rate to higher inflation and the artificially low interest rates set by the Federal Reserve.
In a 2002 interview with Southland Today, Schiff predicted that the economic downturn triggered by the bursting of the stock market bubble would lead to a bear market likely to last “another 5 to 10 years.” In November 2002, US stocks began a bull market uptrend which held steady for at least five years, until reversing course in 2008, when the Dow, NASDAQ, and S&P 500 began a decline to less than half of their peak 2008 values, followed in 2009 by the Dow climbing 61% from its low point over the following year. After interviewing Schiff in 2009, journalist and finance author Eric Tyson, referenced various Schiff predictions during the 2000s and stated that “On all of these counts, Schiff wasn’t just wrong but ended up being hugely wrong.” Schiff later released a video stating that, “When I gave that interview in 2002, I had no way of knowing how irresponsible the Fed was going to be … But I recognized that early: back in 2003 and 2004 I changed my forecast … if you look at what happened to the Dow in terms of gold [and not U.S. dollars], my forecast was extremely accurate.”
In an August 2006 interview he said: “The United States economy is like the Titanic and I am here with the lifeboat trying to get people to leave the ship… I see a real financial crisis coming for the United States.” On December 31, 2006 in debate on Fox News, Schiff forecast that “what’s going to happen in 2007″ is that “real estate prices are going to come crashing back down to Earth”.
As part of these exchanges on Fox News and his repeated appearances on financial news network CNBC, Schiff had mentioned factors such as speculators and “the absence of lending standards” which are now seen by many to indeed be contributing factors to the housing crisis of 2007-2009. On December 13, 2007 in a Bloomberg interview on the show Open Exchange, Schiff further added that he felt that the crisis would extend to the credit card lending industry. Following this observation, it was soon reported on December 23, 2007 by the Associated Press that “The value of credit card accounts at least 30 days late jumped 26 percent to $17.3 billion in October from a year earlier at 17 large credit card trusts examined by the AP… At the same time, defaults — when lenders essentially give up hope of ever being repaid and write off the debt — rose 18 percent to almost $961 million in October, according to filings made by the trusts with the Securities and Exchange Commission.”
Since 2007, Schiff has stated many times that if the government doesn’t change course there will be hyperinflation in the US. Schiff is one of a minority of economists credited with accurately predicting the financial crisis of 2007–2010 while “nearly all [macroeconomists] failed to foresee the recession despite plenty of warning signs”. In his book Crash Proof, he described several aspects of the U.S. economy that would lead to a recession. …”
Remarks by Governor Ben S. Bernanke Before the National Economists Club, Washington, D.C.
November 21, 2002Deflation: Making Sure “It” Doesn’t Happen Here
“…Deflation: Its Causes and Effects
Deflation is defined as a general decline in prices, with emphasis on the word “general.” At any given time, especially in a low-inflation economy like that of our recent experience, prices of some goods and services will be falling. Price declines in a specific sector may occur because productivity is rising and costs are falling more quickly in that sector than elsewhere or because the demand for the output of that sector is weak relative to the demand for other goods and services. Sector-specific price declines, uncomfortable as they may be for producers in that sector, are generally not a problem for the economy as a whole and do not constitute deflation. Deflation per se occurs only when price declines are so widespread that broad-based indexes of prices, such as the consumer price index, register ongoing declines.
The sources of deflation are not a mystery. Deflation is in almost all cases a side effect of a collapse of aggregate demand–a drop in spending so severe that producers must cut prices on an ongoing basis in order to find buyers.1 Likewise, the economic effects of a deflationary episode, for the most part, are similar to those of any other sharp decline in aggregate spending–namely, recession, rising unemployment, and financial stress.
However, a deflationary recession may differ in one respect from “normal” recessions in which the inflation rate is at least modestly positive: Deflation of sufficient magnitude may result in the nominal interest rate declining to zero or very close to zero.2 Once the nominal interest rate is at zero, no further downward adjustment in the rate can occur, since lenders generally will not accept a negative nominal interest rate when it is possible instead to hold cash. At this point, the nominal interest rate is said to have hit the “zero bound.”
Deflation great enough to bring the nominal interest rate close to zero poses special problems for the economy and for policy. First, when the nominal interest rate has been reduced to zero, the real interest rate paid by borrowers equals the expected rate of deflation, however large that may be.3 To take what might seem like an extreme example (though in fact it occurred in the United States in the early 1930s), suppose that deflation is proceeding at a clip of 10 percent per year. Then someone who borrows for a year at a nominal interest rate of zero actually faces a 10 percent real cost of funds, as the loan must be repaid in dollars whose purchasing power is 10 percent greater than that of the dollars borrowed originally. In a period of sufficiently severe deflation, the real cost of borrowing becomes prohibitive. Capital investment, purchases of new homes, and other types of spending decline accordingly, worsening the economic downturn. …”
Sustained deflation can be highly destructive to a modern economy and should be strongly resisted. Fortunately, for the foreseeable future, the chances of a serious deflation in the United States appear remote indeed, in large part because of our economy’s underlying strengths but also because of the determination of the Federal Reserve and other U.S. policymakers to act preemptively against deflationary pressures. Moreover, as I have discussed today, a variety of policy responses are available should deflation appear to be taking hold. Because some of these alternative policy tools are relatively less familiar, they may raise practical problems of implementation and of calibration of their likely economic effects. For this reason, as I have emphasized, prevention of deflation is preferable to cure. Nevertheless, I hope to have persuaded you that the Federal Reserve and other economic policymakers would be far from helpless in the face of deflation, even should the federal funds rate hit its zero bound.19
“…Alexander Emerick Jones (born February 11, 1974) is an American talk radio host, actor and filmmaker. His syndicated news/talk show The Alex Jones Show, based in Austin, Texas, airs via the Genesis Communication Network over sixty AM, FM, and shortwave radio stations across the United States and on the Internet. His websites include Infowars.com and PrisonPlanet.com.
Mainstream news sources have referred to him as right-wing, conservative, and a conspiracy theorist.
Jones sees himself as a libertarian, and rejects being described as a right-winger. He has also called himself a paleoconservative. In a promotional biography he is described as an “aggressive constitutionalist”.
Jones was born on February 11, 1974 in Dallas, Texas, and grew up in the suburb of Rockwall. His father is a dentist. He graduated from Anderson High School in northwest Austin, Texas in 1993. After high school he briefly attended Austin Community College.
He began his career in Austin with a live, call-in format cable access television program. In 1996, Jones switched format to KJFK, hosting a show named The Final Edition. In 1998, he released his first film, America Destroyed By Design
In 1998, Jones spearheaded an effort to build a memorial for the members who died at the David Koresh-led Branch Davidian compound/church near Waco, Texas, including the ATF officers who died. He often featured the project on his cable access program and claimed that Koresh and his followers were peaceful people who were murdered by Attorney General Janet Reno and the ATF in the infamous Waco Siege.
In 1999, he tied with Shannon Burke for that year’s “Best Austin Talk Radio Host” poll as voted by The Austin Chronicle readers. Later that year, he was fired from KJFK-FM. According to the station’s operations manager, Jones was fired because his viewpoints made the show hard to sell to advertisers and he refused to broaden his topics. Jones argued: “It was purely political, and it came down from on high,” and, “I was told 11 weeks ago to lay off Clinton, to lay off all these politicians, to not talk about rebuilding the church, to stop bashing the Marines, A to Z.”
In early 2000, Jones was one of seven Republican candidates for state representative in Texas House District 48, an open seat swing district based in Austin, Texas. Jones stated that he was running, “to be a watchdog on the inside.” He aborted his campaign and withdrew before the March primary when polls indicated he had little chance of winning.
In July 2000, a group of Austin Community Access Center (ACAC) programmers claimed that Jones used legal proceedings and ACAC policy to intimidate them or get their shows thrown off the air. The programmers made their views known via radio broadcast and websites. Also in 2000, Jones and assistant Mike Hanson infiltrated Bohemian Grove and filmed the opening weekend ceremony, known as the Cremation of Care, claiming it to be mock child sacrifice in front of a 40-foot-tall (12 m) stone owl of Moloch.
On June 8, 2006, while on his way to cover a meeting of the Bilderberg group in Ottawa, Canada, Jones was stopped and detained at the Ottawa airport by Canadian authorities who confiscated his passport, camera equipment, and most of his belongings. He was later allowed to enter Canada lawfully. Jones said regarding the reason for his immigration hold, “I want to say, on the record, it takes two to tango. I could have handled it better.”
On September 8, 2007, he was arrested while protesting at 6th Avenue and 48th Street in New York City. He was charged with operating a bullhorn without a permit. Two others were also cited for disorderly conduct when his group crashed a live television show featuring Geraldo Rivera. In an article, one of Jones’s fellow protesters said “It was … guerilla information warfare.”
The Alex Jones Show
The Alex Jones Show syndicated radio program is broadcast nationally by Genesis Communications Network to more than 60 AM and FM radio stations in the United States, and to WWCR Radio shortwave. Live-broadcast times are weekdays 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. CST and Sundays from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. CST. The Sunday broadcast is also broadcast by Emmis Communications’ KLBJ Radio. All broadcasts are also available online at prisonplanet.com and infowars.com for live, streaming, podcast or smartphone listening.
Guests have included congressman Ron Paul, country music icon Willie Nelson, former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura, author and speaker Jordan Maxwell, actor Charlie Sheen, rapper KRS-One, musician Shooter Jennings, Muse frontman Matthew Bellamy, British politicians Nigel Farage and Christopher Monckton, trends researcher Gerald Celente, musician Dave Mustaine of Megadeth, antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan, writer David Icke, the Rev. Ted Pike, the Rev. Lindsey Williams, as well as various other guests.
Alex Jones is also the operator of several web sites centered on news and information about civil liberties issues, global government, and a wide variety of current events topics. The best known of these sites are http://www.infowars.com and http://www.prisonplanet.com.
Davies Sees Fed Quantitative Easing Spurring U.S. Growth: Video
Background Articles and Videos
Quantitative Easing – How It Works
Marc Faber Sees Fed Introducing `Massive’ Quantitative Easing
Rick Santelli Rips Tim Geithner and Quantitative Easing
Quantitative Easing Only Tool Left for Fed
Roger E. A. Farmer: Quantitative Easing
Peter Schiff: Deflation vs. Inflation Argument on FSN
United States Treasury security
“…A United States Treasury security is government debt issued by the United States Department of the Treasury through the Bureau of the Public Debt. Treasury securities are the debt financing instruments of the United States Federal government, and they are often referred to simply as Treasuries. There are four types of marketable treasury securities: Treasury bills, Treasury notes, Treasury bonds, and Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS). There are several types of non-marketable treasury securities including State and Local Government Series (SLGS), Government Account Series debt issued to government-managed trust funds, and savings bonds. All of the marketable Treasury securities are very liquid and are heavily traded on the secondary market. The non-marketable securities (such as savings bonds) are issued to subscribers and cannot be transferred through market sales.
The U.S. government knew that the costs of World War I would be great, and the question of how to pay for the war was a matter of intense debate. The resulting decision was to pay for the war with a balance between higher taxes (see the War Tax Act) and government debt. Traditionally, the government borrowed from other countries, but there were no other countries from which to borrow in 1917: U.S. citizens would have to fully finance the war through both higher taxes and purchases of war bonds.
The Treasury raised funding throughout the war by floating $21.5 billion in ‘Liberty bonds.’ These bonds were sold at subscription where officials created coupon price and then sold it at Par value. At this price, subscriptions could be filled in as little as one day, but usually remained open for several weeks, depending on demand for the bond.
After the war, the Liberty Bonds were reaching maturity, but the Treasury was unable to pay each down fully with only limited budget surpluses. The resolution to this problem was to refinance the debt with variable short and medium-term maturities. Again the Treasury issued debt through fixed-price subscription, where both the coupon and the price of the debt were dictated by the treasury.
The problems with debt issuance became apparent in the late-1920’s. The system suffered from chronic oversubscription, where interest rates were so attractive that there were more purchasers of debt than supplied by the government. This indicated that the government was paying too much for debt. As government debt was undervalued, debt purchasers could buy from the government and immediately sell to another market participant at a higher price.
In 1929, the U.S. Treasury shifted from the fixed-price subscription system to a system of auctioning where ‘Treasury Bills’ would be sold to the highest bidder. Securities were then issued on a pro rata system where securities would be allocated to the highest bidder until their demand was full. If more treasuries were supplied by the government, they would then be allocated to the next highest bidder. This system allowed the market to set the price rather than the government. On December 10, 1929, the Treasury issued its first auction. The result was the issuing of $224 million three-month bills. The highest bid was at 99.310 with the lowest bid accepted at 99.152.
Foreign countries later started to buy U.S. debt as an investment of their surplus U.S. Dollars. There is fear that foreign countries hold so many bonds that if they stopped buying them, the U.S. economy would collapse; however, the reality is that more bonds are transferred in a single day by the Treasury than are held by any single sovereign state. The perception of this dependence furthers belief that the U.S. and China economies are so tightly linked that both fear the consequences of a potential slow down in China’s purchase of those bonds. In her visit to China, U.S. State Secretary Hillary Clinton called on authorities in Beijing to continue buying U.S. Treasuries, saying it would help jumpstart the flagging U.S. economy and stimulate imports of Chinese goods.
As the economic recession continues, more doubts arise over the real value of U.S. treasury securities. Though carefully worded, Chinese premier Wen Jia Bao’s warning about possible devaluation of Chinese held U.S. bonds was taken very seriously by Washington:
“Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I’m a little bit worried” … “I would like to call on the United States to honor its words, stay a credible nation and ensure the safety of Chinese assets.” – Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao, said at a news conference after the closing of China’s 2009 legislative session.
However, it is important to note that such comments, while critical, were very likely indicative of Chinese “gesturing” ahead of the April 1st G-20 Economic Summit. As of April 2009, the U.S. dollar had rallied YTD against all other major world currencies. On March 18, 2009, the Federal Reserve used quantitative easing “to help improve conditions in private credit markets, the Committee decided to purchase up to $300 billion of longer-term Treasury securities over the next six months.” …”
Directly issued by the United States Government
Treasury bills (or T-Bills) mature in one year or less. Like zero-coupon bonds, they do not pay interest prior to maturity; instead they are sold at a discount of the par value to create a positive yield to maturity. Many regard Treasury bills as the least risky investment available to U.S. investors.
Regular weekly T-Bills are commonly issued with maturity dates of 28 days (or 4 weeks, about a month), 91 days (or 13 weeks, about 3 months), 182 days (or 26 weeks, about 6 months), and 364 days (or 52 weeks, about 1 year). Treasury bills are sold by single price auctions held weekly. Offering amounts for 13-week and 26-week bills are announced each Thursday for auction, usually at 11:30 a.m., on the following Monday and settlement, or issuance, on Thursday. Offering amounts for 4-week bills are announced on Monday for auction the next day, Tuesday, usually at 11:30 a.m., and issuance on Thursday. Offering amounts for 52-week bills are announced every fourth Thursday for auction the next Tuesday, usually at 11:30 am, and issuance on Thursday. Purchase orders at TreasuryDirect must be entered before 11:00 on the Monday of the auction. The minimum purchase, effective April 7, 2008, is $100. (This amount formerly had been $1,000.) Mature T-bills are also redeemed on each Thursday. Banks and financial institutions, especially primary dealers, are the largest purchasers of T-bills.
Like other securities, individual issues of T-bills are identified with a unique CUSIP number. The 13-week bill issued three months after a 26-week bill is considered a re-opening of the 26-week bill and is given the same CUSIP number. The 4-week bill issued two months after that and maturing on the same day is also considered a re-opening of the 26-week bill and shares the same CUSIP number. For example, the 26-week bill issued on March 22, 2007, and maturing on September 20, 2007, has the same CUSIP number (912795A27) as the 13-week bill issued on June 21, 2007, and maturing on September 20, 2007, and as the 4-week bill issued on August 23, 2007 that matures on September 20, 2007.
During periods when Treasury cash balances are particularly low, the Treasury may sell cash management bills (or CMBs). These are sold at a discount and by auction just like weekly Treasury bills. They differ in that they are irregular in amount, term (often less than 21 days), and day of the week for auction, issuance, and maturity. When CMBs mature on the same day as a regular weekly bill, usually Thursday, they are said to be on-cycle. The CMB is considered another reopening of the bill and has the same CUSIP. When CMBs mature on any other day, they are off-cycle and have a different CUSIP number.
Treasury bills are quoted for purchase and sale in the secondary market on an annualized discount percentage, or basis.
With the advent of TreasuryDirect, individuals can now purchase T-Bills online and have funds withdrawn from and deposited directly to their personal bank account and earn higher interest rates on their savings.
General calculation for the discount yield for Treasury bills is
 Treasury note
This is the modern usage of “Treasury Note” in the U.S., for the earlier meanings see Treasury Note (disambiguation).
Treasury notes (or T-Notes) mature in one to ten years. They have a coupon payment every six months, and are commonly issued with maturities dates between 1 to 10 years, with denominations of $1,000. In the basic transaction, one buys a “$1,000″ T-Note for say, $950, collects interest over 10 years of say, 3% per year, which comes to $30 yearly, and at the end of the 10 years cashes it in for $1000. So, $950 over the course of 10 years becomes $1300.
T-Notes and T-Bonds are quoted on the secondary market at percentage of par in thirty-seconds of a point (n/32 of a point, where n = 1,2,3,…). Thus, for example, a quote of 95:07 on a note indicates that it is trading at a discount: $952.19 (i.e., 95 + 7/32%) for a $1,000 bond. (Several different notations may be used for bond price quotes. The example of 95 and 7/32 points may be written as 95:07, or 95-07, or 95’07, or decimalized as 95.21875.) Other notation includes a +, which indicates 1/64 points and a third digit may be specified to represent 1/256 points. Examples include 95:07+ which equates to (95 + 7/32 + 1/64) and 95:073 which equates to (95 + 7/32 + 3/256). Notation such as 95:073+ is unusual and not typically used.
The 10-year Treasury note has become the security most frequently quoted when discussing the performance of the U.S. government bond market and is used to convey the market’s take on longer-term macroeconomic expectations.
“U.S. Bonds” redirects here. You may be looking for the singer Gary U.S. Bonds.
Treasury bonds (T-Bonds, or the long bond) have the longest maturity, from twenty years to thirty years. They have a coupon payment every six months like T-Notes, and are commonly issued with maturity of thirty years. The secondary market is highly liquid, so the yield on the most recent T-Bond offering was commonly used as a proxy for long-term interest rates in general. This role has largely been taken over by the 10-year note, as the size and frequency of long-term bond issues declined significantly in the 1990s and early 2000s.
The U.S. Federal government suspended issuing the well-known 30-year Treasury bonds (often called long-bonds) for a four and a half year period starting October 31, 2001 and concluding February 2006. As the U.S. government used its budget surpluses to pay down the Federal debt in the late 1990s, the 10-year Treasury note began to replace the 30-year Treasury bond as the general, most-followed metric of the U.S. bond market. However, because of demand from pension funds and large, long-term institutional investors, along with a need to diversify the Treasury’s liabilities – and also because the flatter yield curve meant that the opportunity cost of selling long-dated debt had dropped – the 30-year Treasury bond was re-introduced in February 2006 and is now issued quarterly. This brought the U.S. in line with Japan and European governments issuing longer-dated maturities amid growing global demand from pension funds.
Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (or TIPS) are the inflation-indexed bonds issued by the U.S. Treasury. The principal is adjusted to the Consumer Price Index, the commonly used measure of inflation. The coupon rate is constant, but generates a different amount of interest when multiplied by the inflation-adjusted principal, thus protecting the holder against inflation. TIPS are currently offered in 5-year, 10-year and 30-year maturities.
“Part of making good decisions in business is recognizing the poor decisions you’ve made and why they were poor. I’ve made lots of mistakes. I’m going to make more. It’s the name of the game. You don’t want to expect perfection in yourself. You want to strive to do your best. It’s too demanding to expect perfection in yourself.”
The World’s Greatest Money Maker: Warren Buffett – BBC Documentary – 1 of 6
The World’s Greatest Money Maker: Warren Buffett – BBC Documentary – 2 of 6
The World’s Greatest Money Maker: Warren Buffett – BBC Documentary -3 of 6
The World’s Greatest Money Maker: Warren Buffett – BBC Documentary 4 of 6
The World’s Greatest Money Maker: Warren Buffett – BBC Documentary – 5 of 6
The World’s Greatest Money Maker: Warren Buffett – BBC Documentary – 6 of 6
Warren Buffet on Economic Recovery
Warren Buffett Interview on How to Read Stocks
Warren Buffett- Value Investing 101
Warren Buffett on Teaching Kids Finance
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 1
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 2
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 3
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 4
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 5
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 6
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 7
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 8
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 9
Warren Buffett MBA Talk – Part 10
Evan Davis talks to Warren Buffett (Part-1)
Evan Davis talks to Warren Buffett (Part-2)
Warren Buffett on Credit Crisis & GE Investment
Warren Buffett on Solution to Toxic Assets
Warren Buffett on Bank Regulation
Warren Buffett on Great Recession & BNSF Acquisition
Warren Buffett Agrees: Burlington Was an Inflation Play
Bill Gates e Buffet p1 THE RICHEST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD
Bill Gates e Buffet p2 THE RICHEST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD
Bill Gates e Buffet p3 THE RICHEST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD
Bill Gates e Buffet p4 THE RICHEST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD
Bill Gates e Buffet p5 THE RICHEST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD
Bill Gates e Buffet p6 THE RICHEST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD
Bill Gates e Buffet p7 THE RICHEST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD
Bill Gates e Buffet p8 THE RICHEST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD
Bill Gates talking about Warren Buffett
Warren Buffett and Bill Gates on Their Relationship and Market Opportunities
“…Warren Edward Buffett (pronounced /ˈbʌfɨt/; born August 30, 1930) is an American investor, industrialist and philanthropist. He is widely regarded as one of the most successful investors in the world. Often called the “legendary investor Warren Buffett”, he is the primary shareholder, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway. He is consistently ranked among the world’s wealthiest people, he was ranked as the world’s second wealthiest person in 2009 and is currently the third wealthiest person in the world as of 2010.
Buffett is called the “Oracle of Omaha” or the “Sage of Omaha” and is noted for his adherence to the value investing philosophy and for his personal frugality despite his immense wealth. Buffett is also a notable philanthropist, having pledged to give away 99 percent of his fortune to philanthropic causes, primarily via the Gates Foundation. He also serves as a member of the board of trustees at Grinnell College.
“But if you’ve got the principles, if you know what makes a good business, if you know what makes a good manager, if you know what makes a good product, and you learn that in one business, there is some transference to other businesses. As you go along, you learn what things you’re not going to understand. Knowing what to leave out is just as important as knowing what to focus on. Somebody said how to beat Bobby Fischer; you play him any game except chess. And so I don’t play Bobby Fischer at chess.”
Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire
“…Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire is a 2004 documentary narrated by Julian Bond and directed by Jeremy Earp and Sut Jhally. It examines the possibility that neoconservatives used the September 11, 2001 attacks to usher in a new doctrine of expanding American power through military force under the guise of a “war on terror” and that the doctrine, known as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), had been laid out prior to 9/11 by its authors, which include Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush and Dan Quayle. …”
The film maintains that fear of terrorism was manipulated to support goals which are in step with the PNAC; namely the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Not just for control of regional strategic resources (natural gas and oil), but to reassert American dominance on the world stage as a warning to potential adversaries. Interviews were conducted with critics such as Noam Chomsky and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Jody Williams. It also interviews policy analysts, military brass, journalists, insider observations from Chief UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter and Pentagon whistleblower Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski.
The historical context of the “Bush Doctrine” is examined and compared to Wolfowitz’s PNAC philosophy. The film goes on to look at the “selling of American empire” and the possible economical, social, cultural and political implications it will have in America, and on the world if implemented further during Bush’s second term. …”
“…Satvinder “Sut” Jhally(Hindi: सुत्त झल्ली),(Punjabi: ਸੁੱਤ ਝੱਲੀ) (born 29 May 1955) is a professor of Communication at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and is a cultural studies scholar in the area of advertising, media, and consumption. He is the producer of several documentaries on media literacy topics and the founder and executive director of the Media Education Foundation, a non-profit established in 1992 which “produces and distributes video documentaries to encourage critical thinking and debate about the relationship between media ownership, commercial media content, and the democratic demand for free flows of information, diverse representations of ideas and people, and informed citizen participation.”
Sut Jhally was born in Kenya, and raised in England. He moved to Canada in 1978 after accepting a scholarship to the University of Victoria. He continued his studies at Simon Fraser University, where he received his Ph.D.
Jhally is often highly critical of popular culture, advertising, as well as various aspects of US foreign policy.
In his 1991 video “Dreamworlds” he describes the image of women in music videos as male adolescent fantasies: young and pretty, willing and eager to please men, saying no when meaning yes, often reduced to outward appearances and body parts. He concludes that an unhealthy attitude towards sexual violence can be fostered by these videos, and calls for balancing them with other cultural representations of sexuality. When MTV complained about his use of parts of copyrighted music videos, he claimed fair use and contacted the media about the story.
He has been quoted as saying, “Advertising tells us that the way to happiness is through the consumption of objects. The immense accumulation of commodities has to be sold, and it is sold through the story of goods bringing happiness.” In his essay “Advertising at the Edge of the Apocalypse” and his video “Advertising and the End of the World” he argues that the major cultural force today, pervasive advertising, by constantly reinforcing a bogus association between consumerism and happiness and by focusing on individual immediate needs, stands in the way of a discussion of societal and long-term needs and leads to a squandering of resources. The video “Killing Us Softly III”, created with Jean Kilbourne, is a critique of the image of women in advertising.
Among other quotes students of his communication classes will hear from him, two of the most unforgettable are “knowing where something comes from, changes how you feel about it” and the phrase “the discourse through and about objects.”
In the 2004 video “Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land” he shows the influence of Israeli propaganda and PR on the United States public opinion regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
In the 2004 video “Hijacking Catastrophe” he argues that the “war on terror” has been used by U.S. officials as a pretext to project military power across the world.
In his 2006 video “Reel Bad Arabs” he explores the vilification of Arabs in American cinema, following Jack Shaheen’s 2001 book Reel Bad Arabs.
Dreamworlds 3: Desire, Sex & Power in Music Video (2007) (trailer)
Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People (2006), based on Jack Shaheen’s 2001 book Reel Bad Arabs (trailer)
Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land (with Bathsheba Ratzkoff), (2004) (full video)
Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire (with Jeremy Earp), (2004) (full video)
Wrestling with Manhood: Boys, Bullying & Battering (with Jackson Katz) (2002) (trailer)
No Logo (2003), based on Naomi Klein’s book No Logo (full video)
Killing Us Softly 3 (with Jean Kilbourne) (1999) (full video)
Tough Guise: Men, Violence and the Crisis in Masculinity (with Jackson Katz) (1999) (trailer)
Off the Straight and Narrow (with Katherine Sender) (1998) (trailer)
Advertising and the End of the World (1998) (trailer)
Dreamworlds II: Desire, Sex, Power in Music Video (1997) (full video)
Slim Hopes (with Jean Kilbourne) (1995) (trailer)
The Date Rape Backlash (1994) (trailer)
The Killing Screens (with George Gerbner) (1994) (trailer)
Pack of Lies – the Advertising of Tobacco (with Jean Kilbourne) (1992) (trailer) …”
“…The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was an American think tank based in Washington, D.C. that lasted from early 1997 to 2006. It was co-founded as a non-profit educational organization by neoconservatives William Kristol and Robert Kagan. The PNAC’s stated goal was “to promote American global leadership.” Fundamental to the PNAC were the view that “American leadership is both good for America and good for the world” and support for “a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity.” The PNAC exerted influence on high-level U.S. government officials in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush and affected the Bush Administration’s development of military and foreign policies, especially involving national security and the Iraq War.
“…Massimo Mazzucco (born 20 July 1954 in Turin) is an Italian filmmaker who is known for producing documentary films such as The New American Century and Cancer -The Forbidden Cures. Mazzucco is also the editor of luogocomune.net, an Italian news site known especially for research regarding the September 11 WTC attacks. …”
“…Digital Format Documentaries / DVD
Inganno Globale / Global Deceit – 2006
“The first Italian film on 9/11, in 2006 sparked a major debate on the Italian media, after having being broadcast by Berlusconi’s Canale 5.”
The New American Century / Il Nuovo Secolo Americano – 2007
“As a follow-up to Global Deceit, The New American Century presents the historical, philosophical, economical and political background — some of which is totally unknown to the public — that lend support to the accusation that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were in fact an inside-job.”
“Historically accurate, narratively captivating, The New American Century is one of the best films about the facts behind the 9/11 attacks.” –Webster G. Tarpley 
“The New American Century is a stunning film. It should be seen as widely as possible, in cinemas, bars, clubs, at meetings and, of course, through the internet. I’m sure the film will continue to be a source of debate and political education for many years.” –Ken Loach 
News Update: FHFA releases bailout estimates for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
Congressman Lee (NY-26) talks w/ Neil Cavuto about Fannie and Freddie’s role in overseeing TARP
Garrett: End Bailout of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
Bachus: Democrats Have No Intention Of Acting To End Fannie, Freddie Bailout
Barney Frank Offering Yet More Excuses On Why The Democrats Will Not End Fannie, Freddie Bailout
Jim Rogers Speaks the Truth about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Background Articles and Videos
Fannie, Freddie bailout cost is likely to rise to $154 billion, agency projects
“…In the most likely, as defined by the agency, which regulates the two companies, housing prices would decline slightly amid a modest economic recovery, and then inch upward. In this scenario, the total bailout of Fannie and Freddie would cost $19 billion more, or $154 billion.
A more optimistic projection has the housing market springing back to life sooner. In this case, the companies would need just $6 billion more, or $141 billion.
Finally, in a darker scenario, in which housing goes into another tailspin amid a second recession, they would cost $124 billion more, or $259 billion.
Federal Financial Analytics, a Washington research firm, said the FHFA projection gave a good indication of what Fannie and Freddie may ultimately cost taxpayers, but “nowhere near a definitive picture of it.”
The firm noted that the analysis was based on housing prices and ignored the potential costs associated with a massive breakdown in the foreclosure process that has recently come to light. …”
“…Tom Hayden, Bill Fletcher Jr, Danny Glover and Barbara Ehrenreich announced the formation of Progressives for Obama in a March 24 2008 article in The Nation.
All American progressives should unite for Barack Obama.
During past progressive peaks in our political history — the late Thirties, the early Sixties — social movements have provided the relentless pressure and innovative ideas that allowed centrist leaders to embrace visionary solutions. We find ourselves in just such a situation today.
We intend to join and engage with our brothers and sisters in the vast rainbow of social movements to come together in support of Obama’s unprecedented campaign and candidacy. Even though it is candidate-centered, there is no doubt that the campaign is a social movement, one greater than the candidate himself ever imagined.
Progressives can make a difference in close primary races like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Oregon and Puerto Rico and in the November general election. We can contribute our dollars. We have the proven online capacity to reach millions of swing voters in the primary and general election. We can and will defend Obama against negative attacks from any quarter. We will seek Green support against the claim of some that there are no real differences between Obama and McCain. We will criticize any efforts by Democratic superdelegates to suppress the winner of the popular and delegate votes, or to legitimize the flawed elections in Michigan and Florida. We will make our agenda known at the Democratic National Convention and fight for a platform emphasizing progressive priorities as the path to victory.
From the Progressives for Obamawebsite;
We agree that Barack Obama is our best option for President in 2008, and that an independent grassroots effort can help strengthen his campaign.
It can also strengthen the mandate for his programs for stopping war, promoting global justice and securing our rights, liberties, and economic well-being. More important, independent organization at the base is needed for compelling social change no matter who is in the White House.
We have understood, from the beginning, that Senator Obama is not a consistent progressive, and often speaks to and from the center of our country’s political spectrum–sometimes well, sometimes not. All the more reason, we think, to organize a strong progressive pole, independent of his campaign, to counter rightward drift and push him to do better on issues that will win him more solid and wider support.
We don’t attempt to define ‘progressive’ here. We’re open to all trends, from the socialist left to moderate liberals, who want not only to defeat McCain, but also build the grassroots organizations and networks for wider and deeper change over the longer term. …”
“…Part biography, part history, part detective story, RADICAL-IN-CHIEF reveals the carefully hidden tale of Barack Obama’s political past. Stanley Kurtz, whose research helped inject the Bill Ayers and ACORN issues into the 2008 presidential campaign, presents the results of more than two years of digging into President Obama’s radical political world. The book is filled with previously unknown information about the president’s past, tied together by a bold argument about what Obama’s deepest political convictions really are.
RADICAL-IN-CHIEF marshals a wide array of never-before-seen evidence to establish that the president of the United States is indeed a socialist. Tracing an unbroken thread of socialist activities and political partnerships, from Obama’s youth through his community organizing days and beyond, the book confirms that the president’s harshest critics have been right about his socialism all along.
RADICAL-IN-CHIEF also exposes the truth about community organizers–the socialist beliefs they hold and hide, and how they trained and groomed a president. Obama’s community organizer colleagues had a strategy for slowly and stealthily turning the United States into a socialist nation. The Obama administration is carrying out that strategy today.
This book will forever change our national debate about who Barack Obama is. …”
Kurtz With Bill Bennett To Discuss Obama Ties To Bill Ayers
“…Stanley Kurtz is a Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. On a wide range of issues, from marriage and family, to higher education reform, to the place of religion in public life, to the challenges of democratization abroad, Mr. Kurtz is a key contributor to American public debates. Mr. Kurtz has written frequently on these and other issues for various journals, including National Review Online(where he is a contributing editor), the Weekly Standard, <em>Policy ReviewCity Journal</em>, and <em>Commentary.
Mr. Kurtz has provided a critical public voice in defense of traditional marriage as well as insightful commentary on the tensions between religion and secularism in modern society. He also has led the campaign to reform federal subsidies to academic programs of “area studies” under Title VI of the Higher Education Act.
Mr. Kurtz received his undergraduate degree from Haverford College and his Ph.D. in social anthropology from Harvard University. He later taught at Harvard, winning several teaching awards for his work in a Great Books program. He was also Dewey Prize Lecturer in Psychology at the University of Chicago. …”
“…He is an adjunct fellow of the Hudson Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, with a special interest in America’s “culture wars.” Kurtz writes regularly for publications such as National Review, Policy Review, The Weekly Standard, The Wall Street Journal, and Commentary. Kurtz graduated from Haverford College and holds a Ph.D. in social anthropology from Harvard University. He did his field work in India and taught at Harvard and the University of Chicago. He has published extensively on family life, child rearing, religion, and psychology in various parts of the world.
During the 2008 election cycle, Kurtz published several editorials that discussed relationships between Barack Obama and some Chicago church leaders such as Jeremiah Wright, and former Weather Underground member Bill Ayers. In August 2008, Kurtz obtained records concerning Chicago Annenberg Challenge from the University of Illinois at Chicago. According to Kurtz, the educational program on which Obama and Ayers collaborated was ultimately unsuccessful.
“…The Schlarbaum Prize for the lifetime defense of liberty in 2010 goes to James Beeland Rogers. Jim Rogers has been a constant media presence for many years, accurately predicted the current boom-bust. He uses every opportunity to explain his economic rationale by his investment outlook, which is solidly rooted Misesian theory, not only of business cycles but of the costs of the welfare-warfare state.
In his commentary and investment outlook, he illustrates the way in which sound economics can serve as a critical intellectual infrastructure for understanding and interpreting economic events.
He has been guest professor at the Columbia University Graduate School of Business and is author of several important books on finance and investing. He was raised in Demopolis, Alabama, graduated from Yale and Oxford, co-founded the Quantum Fund in 1970, holds three world records for motorcycle travel (as noted by Guinness), and founded Rogers International Commodity Index in 1998.
The Schlarbaum Prize will be awarded at the Mises Institute Supporters Summit in Auburn, Alabama, October 8-9, 2010. The prize carries with it a $10,000 cash award. The prize has been given since 1999. …”
Rush – George Soros – I Can’t Stop The Republican Avalanche,Your On Your Own Barry
George Soros’s plan to fix the world
O’Reilly: George Soros is funding Media Matters,John Edwards
Hannity exposes Media Matters and MoveOn
Michael Savage Rips Into Media Matters and George Soros
Michael Savage Links George Soros With The Marijuana Movement 3-26-2010
Background Articles and Videos
Soros gives $1 million to Media Matters
“…George Soros announced that he has given $1 million to Media Matters “to hold Fox News accountable for the false and misleading information they so often broadcast.” Fox commentators frequently describe Media Matters, a frequent Fox critic, of being funded by Soros, but Media Matters has long denied that connection.
In today’s joint announcement, Soros denied it too – at least until today.
“Despite repeated assertions to the contrary by various Fox News commentators, I have not to date been a funder of Media Matters,” Soros said. “However, in view of recent evidence suggesting that the incendiary rhetoric of Fox News hosts may incite violence, I have now decided to support the organization. Media Matters is one of the few groups that attempts to hold Fox News accountable for the false and misleading information they so often broadcast. I am supporting Media Matters in an effort to more widely publicize the challenge Fox News poses to civil and informed discourse in our democracy.”
Soros figured prominently in the conspiracy theory that allegedly drove convicted felon Byron Williams to arm himself and set out to kill staffers at the Soros-funded Tides Foundation the ACLU this summer.
Although Williams said he had first heard of the theory from other sources, he told Media Matters in a jailhouse interview that Glenn Beck was a “schoolteacher” who “blew my mind” on such topics. He told the interviewer to watch Beck’s June shows to get more information about Tides. …”
“…Established in 1976 by California-based activist Drummond Pike, the Tides Foundation was set up as a public charity that receives money from donors and then funnels it to the recipients of their choice. Because many of these recipient groups are quite radical, the donors often prefer not to have their names publicly linked with the donees. By letting the Tides Foundation, in effect, “launder” the money for them and pass it along to the intended beneficiaries, donors can avoid leaving a “paper trail.” Such contributions are called “donor-advised,” or donor-directed, funds.
Through this legal loophole, nonprofit entities can also create for-profit organizations and then funnel money to them through Tides — thereby circumventing the laws that bar nonprofits from directly funding their own for-profit enterprises. Pew Charitable Trusts, for instance, set up three for-profit media companies and then proceeded to fund them via donor-advised contributions to Tides, which (for an 8 percent management fee) in turn sent the money to the media companies.
If a donor wishes to give money to a particular cause but finds that there is no organization in existence dedicated specifically to that issue, the Tides Foundation will, for a fee, create a group to meet that perceived need.
In 1996 the Tides Foundation created, with a $9 million seed grant, a separate but closely related entity called the Tides Center, also headed by Drummond Pike. While the Foundation’s activities focus on fundraising and grant-making, the Center — in its role as fiscal sponsor — offers newly created organizations the shelter of Tides’ own charitable tax-exempt status, as well as the benefits of Tides’ health and liability insurance coverage. As the Capital Research Center explains:
“Under the Tides Center umbrella, the new group can then accept tax deductible contributions without needing to apply immediately to the IRS for tax-exempt 501(c)(3) public charity tax status…. Besides giving a new project its seal of approval, the Tides Center performs a notable service in showing new groups how to run an office, apply for grants, conduct effective public relations, and handle the many personnel, payroll, and budget problems that might baffle a novice group.”
Between 1996 and 2010, the Tides Center served as a fiscal sponsor to some 677 separate projects with combined revenues of $522.4 million; in 2010 alone, the Center was actively managing nearly 200 projects. …”
Derivatives Warning – Michael Greenberger interview
Credit Default Swaps
Greenspan Admits Philisophical Error in “The Warning”
Late 90s fight to regulate derivatives (clip from BBC’s “The Love of Money: The Age of Risk”)
Financial Derivatives: What are They? – Housing Bubble Collapse – Unregulated Insurance
Derivatives: the most crucial aspect of financial regulatory reform
CHHS Director on CNBC’s “Goldman Sachs: Power and Peril”
Goldman Sachs-Robbing and Thieving The American Sucker-AGAIN
The Young Turks: Fraud Exposed At Goldman Sachs
Background Articles and Videos
The Fall of Lehman Brothers P1
The Fall of Lehman Brothers P2
The Fall of Lehman Brothers P3
The Fall of Lehman Brothers P4
The Fall of Lehman Brothers P5
The Fall of Lehman Brothers P6
Credit Default Swap
“…A credit default swap (CDS) is a swap contract and agreement in which the protection buyer of the CDS makes a series of payments (often referred to as the CDS “fee” or “spread”) to the protection seller and, in exchange, receives a payoff if a credit instrument (typically a bond or loan) experiences a credit event.
In its simplest form, a credit default swap is a bilateral contract between the buyer and seller of protection. The CDS will refer to a “reference entity” or “reference obligor”, usually a corporation or government. The reference entity is not a party to the contract. The protection buyer makes quarterly premium payments—the “spread”—to the protection seller. If the reference entity defaults, the protection seller pays the buyer the par value of the bond in exchange for physical delivery of the bond, although settlement may also be by cash or auction. A default is referred to as a “credit event” and include such events as failure to pay, restructuring and bankruptcy. Most CDSs are in the $10–$20 million range with maturities between one and 10 years.
A holder of a bond may “buy protection” to hedge its risk of default. In this way, a CDS is similar to credit insurance, although CDS are not similar to or subject to regulations governing casualty or life insurance. Also, investors can buy and sell protection without owning any debt of the reference entity. These “naked credit default swaps” allow traders to speculate on debt issues and the creditworthiness of reference entities. Credit default swaps can be used to create synthetic long and short positions in the reference entity. Naked CDS constitute most of the market in CDS. In addition, credit default swaps can also be used in capital structure arbitrage.
Credit default swaps have existed since the early 1990s, but the market increased tremendously starting in 2003. By the end of 2007, the outstanding amount was $62.2 trillion, falling to $38.6 trillion by the end of 2008.
Most CDSs are documented using standard forms promulgated by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA), although some are tailored to meet specific needs. Credit default swaps have many variations. In addition to the basic, single-name swaps, there are basket default swaps (BDS), index CDS, funded CDS (also called a credit linked notes), as well as loan only credit default swaps (LCDS). In addition to corporations or governments, the reference entity can include a special purpose vehicle issuing asset backed securities.
Credit default swaps are not traded on an exchange and there is no required reporting of transactions to a government agency. During the 2007-2010 financial crisis the lack of transparency became a concern to regulators, as was the trillion dollar size of the market, which could pose a systemic risk to the economy. In March 2010, the DTCC Trade Information Warehouse (see Sources of Market Data) announced it would voluntarily give regulators greater access to its credit default swaps database.