Tutorials

Three Years Behind The Curve Too Late Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) Increases Target Federal Funds Rate to .75-1.0% — Financial Repression of Savers Slowly Continues — Videos

Posted on March 15, 2017. Filed under: American History, Articles, Banking, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Congress, conservatives, Constitution, Corruption, Crisis, Documentary, Economics, Education, Employment, Faith, Family, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Freedom, government, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Language, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, Monetary Policy, Money, Movies, Non-Fiction, People, Philosophy, Photos, Police, Politics, Radio, Rants, Raves, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Sociology, Speech, Strategy, Television, Trade Policiy, Tutorials, Video, Water, Wealth, Welfare, Wisdom, Work, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Image result for value of us dollar since fed started

Image result for financial repression

Image result for financial repression

Image result for financial repressionImage result for near zero interest rate policy

Image result for near zero interest rate policy thorough 2017

Image result for near zero interest rate policy thorough 2017

Image result for near zero interest rate policy thorough 2017

Image result for near zero interest rate policy thorough 2017 fomc fed

Image result for near zero interest rate policy thorough 2017 fomc fed

Image result for near zero interest rate policy thorough 2017 fomc fed

Image result for near zero interest rate policy thorough february 2017 fomc fed

Image result for Core PCE inflation federal reserve

Image result for PCE federal reserve

 

Fed chair Janet Yellen announces interest rate hike

What the Fed’s interest rate hike means for the economy

Stocks rally on Fed rate hike

Fed Hikes Rates, Signals More Coming

Is the Federal Reserve behind the curve?

What The Fed Rate Hike Means For Consumers

We Are Dangerously Close to a Recession

MARC FABER World Economy Grinding to a Halt. Don’t Trade With Leverage

Marc Faber : Volatility will pick up ‘massively’ , 30.1.2017

Marc Faber Warns : The Market is on the verge of a meaningful correction

Trump, China & World War 3 – Jim Rogers

The Whole System is Riddled With Corruption – James Dale Davidson Interview

Keiser Report: Rise of the Machines (E1043)

Keiser Report: Bloodletting Among Retailers (E1044)

David Stockman Interview Trump to Face Imploding Economy in 2017

David A. Stockman’s TEARS APART Trump’s Economic Plan

The Coming Big Freeze – Jim Rickards – The Daily Reckoning – Road to Ruin

James Rickards 2017 The Fed is Tapped Out & End Result is Ice Nine for Gold

AMTV Truth Exposed Prepare For The Imminent Global Economic Collapse 2017 Stock MARKET CRA

Fed rate hike: Central bank signals faster pace in 2017

Milton Friedman – The Federal Reserve Caused Great Depression

Milton Friedman on the Great Depression, Bank Runs & the Federal Reserve

Milton Friedman – Abolish The Fed

Milton Friedman: The Future of Freedom

Milton Friedman – Why Economists Disagree

Milton Friedman – The role of government in a free society

Milton Friedman Interview with Dallas Fed President Richard W. Fisher

Ep. 228: Inflation Finally Rears Its Head

What happens when the Fed raises rates

How Interest Rates Affect the Market

When Interest Rates Rise: Winners and Losers

ECONOMIC COLLAPSE: Trump to Declare Bankruptcy on U.S.

What’s all the Yellen About? Monetary Policy and the Federal Reserve: Crash Course Economics #10

The Federal Reserve Explained in 3 Minutes

Quantitative Easing Explained

The Collapse of The American Dream Explained in Animation

Who Controls the Money Controls the World

The Story of Your Enslavement

Financial Balance

“The Bernanke” explains Financial Repression

Financial Repression

Carmen Reinhart: Financial Repression Requires A Captive Audience | McAlvany Commentary

50 YEAR OLD CARTOON PREDICTS THE FUTURE !!! NWO !!!

Yellen Calms Fears Fed’s Policy Trigger Finger Is Getting Itchy

March 15, 2017, 1:00 PM CDT March 15, 2017, 5:02 PM CDT
  • Policy makers still project three total rate hikes for 2017
  • FOMC sticks with ‘gradual’ plan for removing accommodation

Fed Raises Benchmark Lending Rate a Quarter Point

Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen sought to reassure investors that the central bank’s latest interest-rate increase wasn’t a paradigm shift to a trigger-happy policy driven by fears of faster inflation.

Speaking to reporters after the Fed’s quarter percentage-point move on Wednesday, Yellen said the central bank was willing to tolerate inflation temporarily overshootingits 2 percent goal and that it intended to keep its policy accommodative for “some time.”

“The simple message is the economy’s doing well. We have confidence in the robustness of the economy and its resilience to shocks,” she said.

As a result, the Fed is sticking with its policy of gradually raising interest rates, Yellen said. In their first forecasts in three months, Fed policy makers penciled in two more quarter-point rate increases this year and three in 2018, unchanged from their projections in December.

Today’s decision “does not represent a reassessment of the economic outlook or of the appropriate course for monetary policy,” the Fed chief said.

Speculation of a more aggressive Fed had mounted in recent days after a host of central bank officials, including Yellen herself, went out of their way to telegraph to financial markets that a rate hike was imminent. The expectations were further fueled by news of rising inflation.

Stocks Advance

Stocks rose and bond yields fell as investors viewed the statement from the Federal Open Market Committee and Yellen’s remarks afterward as a sign that the Fed isn’t in a hurry to remove monetary stimulus. The FOMC raised the target range for the federal funds rate to 0.75 percent to 1 percent, as expected, but Yellen’s lack of urgency to snuff out inflation was a surprise.

R.J. Gallo, a fixed-income investment manager at Federated Investors in Pittsburgh, said the chorus of Fed speakers before this meeting led investors to expect a move up in the number of projected rate hikes this year, and even upgrades by Fed officials in the levels of inflation and growth they anticipated.

None of that materialized.

“You didn’t get any of those things,” Gallo said, which explains why Treasury yields quickly dropped after the Fed released the FOMC statement and a new set of economic projections. “The expectation that Fed was getting more hawkish had to come out of the market.”

The U.S. economy has mostly met the central bank’s goals of full employment and stable prices, and may get further support if President Donald Trump delivers promised fiscal stimulus. Investor and business confidence has soared since Trump won the presidency in November, buoyed by his vows to cut taxes, lift infrastructure spending and ease regulations.

Still, the data don’t show an economy that’s heating up rapidly — a point Yellen herself made after the third rate hike since the 2007-2009 recession ended. In fact, the economy may have “more room to run,” she said.

Stronger business and consumer confidence hasn’t yet translated into increased investment and spending, said Yellen.

“It’s uncertain just how much sentiment actually impacts spending decisions, and I wouldn’t say at this point that I have seen hard evidence of any change in spending decisions,” said the Fed Chair. “Most of the business people that we’ve talked to also have a wait-and-see attitude.”

Retail sales in February grew at the slowest pace since August, a government report showed earlier Wednesday. The Atlanta Fed’s model for GDP predicts an expansion of 0.9 percent in the first quarter, less than a third the pace Trump is aiming for.

Fiscal Stimulus

Asked about the potential for a fiscal boost, Yellen made clear the Fed is still waiting for more concrete policy plans to emerge from the Trump administration before adapting monetary policy in reaction.

“There is great uncertainty about the timing, the size and the character of policy changes that may be put in place,” Yellen said. “I don’t think that’s a decision or set of decisions that we need to make until we know more about what policy changes will go into effect.”

Yellen disputed suggestions that the Fed was on a collision course with the Trump administration over its plans to foster faster economic growth through tax cuts and deregulation. “We would welcome stronger economic growth in the context of price stability,” she said.

She said she had met Trump briefly and had gotten together a couple of times with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to discuss the economy and financial regulation.

Further underscoring their lack of urgency, Fed officials repeated a commitment to maintain their balance-sheet reinvestment policy until rate increases were well under way. Yellen said officials had discussed the process of reducing the balance sheet gradually, but had made no decisions and would continue to debate the topic.

Policy makers forecast inflation will reach 1.9 percent in the fourth quarter this year, and 2 percent in both 2018 and 2019, according to quarterly median estimates released with the FOMC statement. The Fed’s preferred measure of inflation rose 1.9 percent in the 12 months through January, just shy of its target.

Yellen pointed out, though, that core inflation continues to run somewhat further below 2 percent. That rate, which strips out food and energy costs, stood at 1.7 percent in January. The Fed’s new forecast for the core rate at the end of this year edged up to 1.9 percent, from 1.8 percent in December.

“The committee will carefully monitor actual and expected inflation developments relative to its symmetric inflation goal,” the Fed said. Discussing the word symmetric in the statement, Yellen said during her press conference that the Fed was not shooting to push inflation over 2 percent but recognized that it could temporarily go above it. Two percent is a target, she reiterated, not a ceiling.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-15/fed-raises-benchmark-rate-as-inflation-approaches-2-target

Changes in the federal funds rate will always affect the U.S. dollar. When the Federal Reserve increases the federal funds rate, it normally reduces inflationary pressure and works to appreciate the dollar.

Since June 2006, however, the Fed has maintained a federal funds rate of close to 0%. In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the federal funds rate fluctuated between 0-0.25%, and is now 0.75%.

The Fed used this monetary policy to help achieve maximum employment and stable prices. Now that the 2008 financial crisis has largely subsided, the Fed will look to increase interest rates to continue to achieve employment and to stabilize prices.

Inflation of the U.S. Dollar

The best way to achieve full employment and stable prices is to set the inflation rate of the dollar at 2%. In 2011, the Fed officially adopted a 2% annual increase in the price index for personal consumption expenditures as its target. When the economy is weak, inflation naturally falls; when the economy is strong, rising wages increase inflation. Keeping inflation at a growth rate of 2% helps the economy grow at a healthy rate.

Adjustments to the federal funds rate can also affect inflation in the United States. The Fed controls the economy by increasing interest rates when the economy is growing too fast. This encourages people to save more and spend less, reducing inflationary pressure. Conversely, when the economy is in a recession or growing too slowly, the Fed reduces interest rates to stimulate spending, which increases inflation.

During the 2008 financial crisis, the low federal funds rate should have increased inflation. Over this period, the federal funds rate was set near 0%, which encouraged spending and would normally increase inflation.

However, inflation is still well below the 2% target, which is contrary to the normal effects of low interest rates. The Fed cites one-off factors, such as falling oil prices and the strengthening dollar, as the reasons why inflation has remained low in a low interest environment.

The Fed believes that these factors will eventually fade and that inflation will increase above the target 2%. To prevent this eventual increase in inflation, hiking the federal funds rate reduces inflationary pressure and cause inflation of the dollar to remain around 2%.

Appreciation of the U.S. Dollar

Increases in the federal funds rate also result in a strengthening of the U.S. dollar. Other ways that the dollar can appreciate include increases in average wages and increases in overall consumption. However, although jobs are being created, wage rates are stagnant.

Without an increase in wage rates to go along with a strengthening job market, consumption won’t increase enough to sustain economic growth. Additionally, consumption remains subdued due to the fact that the labor force participation rate was close to its 35-year low in 2015. The Fed has kept interest rates low because a lower federal funds rate supports business expansions, which leads to more jobs and higher consumption. This has all worked to keep appreciation of the U.S. dollar low.

However, the U.S. is ahead of the other developed markets in terms of its economic recovery. Although the Fed raises rates cautiously, the U.S. could see higher interest rates before the other developed economies.

Overall, under normal economic conditions, increases in the federal funds rate reduce inflation and increase the appreciation of the U.S. dollar.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/101215/how-fed-fund-rate-hikes-affect-us-dollar.asp

Financial repression

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with economic repression, a type of political repression.

Financial repression refers to “policies that result in savers earning returns below the rate of inflation” in order to allow banks to “provide cheap loans to companies and governments, reducing the burden of repayments”.[1] It can be particularly effective at liquidating government debt denominated in domestic currency.[2] It can also lead to a large expansions in debt “to levels evoking comparisons with the excesses that generated Japan’s lost decade and the Asian financial crisis” in 1997.[1]

The term was introduced in 1973 by Stanford economists Edward S. Shaw and Ronald I. McKinnon[3][4] in order to “disparage growth-inhibiting policies in emerging markets“.

Mechanism

Financial repression consists of the following:[5]

  1. Explicit or indirect capping of interest rates, such as on government debt and deposit rates (e.g., Regulation Q).
  2. Government ownership or control of domestic banks and financial institutions with barriers that limit other institutions from entering the market.
  3. High reserve requirements.
  4. Creation or maintenance of a captive domestic market for government debt, achieved by requiring banks to hold government debt via capital requirements, or by prohibiting or disincentivising alternatives.
  5. Government restrictions on the transfer of assets abroad through the imposition of capital controls.

These measures allow governments to issue debt at lower interest rates. A low nominal interest rate can reduce debt servicing costs, while negative real interest rates erodes the real value of government debt.[5] Thus, financial repression is most successful in liquidating debts when accompanied by inflation and can be considered a form of taxation,[6] or alternatively a form of debasement.[7]

The size of the financial repression tax for 24 emerging markets from 1974 to 1987. Their results showed that financial repression exceeded 2% of GDP for seven countries, and greater than 3% for five countries. For five countries (India, Mexico, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Zimbabwe) it represented approximately 20% of tax revenue. In the case of Mexico financial repression was 6% of GDP, or 40% of tax revenue.[8]

Financial repression is categorized as “macroprudential regulation“—i.e., government efforts to “ensure the health of an entire financial system.[2]

Examples

After World War II

Financial repression “played an important role in reducing debt-to-GDP ratios after World War II” by keeping real interest rates for government debt below 1% for two-thirds of the time between 1945 and 1980, the United States was able to “inflate away” the large debt (122% of GDP) left over from the Great Depression and World War II.[2] In the UK, government debt declined from 216% of GDP in 1945 to 138% ten years later in 1955.[9]

China

China‘s economic growth has been attributed to financial repression thanks to “low returns on savings and the cheap loans that it makes possible”. This has allowed China to rely on savings-financed investments for economic growth. However, because low returns also dampens consumer spending, household expenditures account for “a smaller share of GDP in China than in any other major economy”.[1] However, as of December 2014, the People’s Bank of China “started to undo decades of financial repression” and the government now allows Chinese savers to collect up to a 3.3% return on one-year deposits. At China’s 1.6% inflation rate, this is a “high real-interest rate compared to other major economies”.[1]

After the 2008 economic recession

In a 2011 NBER working paper, Carmen Reinhart and Maria Belen Sbrancia speculate on a possible return by governments to this form of debt reduction in order to deal with high debt levels following the 2008 economic crisis.[5]

“To get access to capital, Austria has restricted capital flows to foreign subsidiaries in central and eastern Europe. Select pension funds have also been transferred to governments in France, Portugal, Ireland and Hungary, enabling them to re-allocate toward sovereign bonds.”[10]

Criticism

Critics[who?] argue that if this view was true, investors (i.e., capital-seeking parties) would be inclined to demand capital in large quantities and would be buying capital goods from this capital. This high demand for capital goods would certainly lead to inflation and thus the central banks would be forced to raise interest rates again. As a boom pepped by low interest rates fails to appear these days in industrialized countries, this is a sign that the low interest rates seem to be necessary to ensure an equilibrium on the capital market, thus to balance capital-supply—i.e., savers—on one side and capital-demand—i.e., investors and the government—on the other. This view argues that interest rates would be even lower if it were not for the high government debt ratio (i.e., capital demand from the government).

Free-market economists argue that financial repression crowds out private-sector investment, thus undermining growth. On the other hand, “postwar politicians clearly decided this was a price worth paying to cut debt and avoid outright default or draconian spending cuts. And the longer the gridlock over fiscal reform rumbles on, the greater the chance that ‘repression’ comes to be seen as the least of all evils”.[11]

Also, financial repression has been called a “stealth tax” that “rewards debtors and punishes savers—especially retirees” because their investments will no longer generate the expected return, which is income for retirees.[10][12] “One of the main goals of financial repression is to keep nominal interest rates lower than they would be in more competitive markets. Other things equal, this reduces the government’s interest expenses for a given stock of debt and contributes to deficit reduction. However, when financial repression produces negative real interest rates (nominal rates below the inflation rate), it reduces or liquidates existing debts and becomes the equivalent of a tax—a transfer from creditors (savers) to borrowers, including the government.”[2]

See also

Reform:

General:

References

  1. ^ Jump up to:a b c d “China Savers Prioritized Over Banks by PBOC”. Bloomberg. November 25, 2014.
  2. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Carmen M. Reinhart, Jacob F. Kirkegaard, and M. Belen Sbrancia, “Financial Repression Redux”, IMF Finance and Development, June 2011, p. 22-26
  3. Jump up^ Shaw, Edward S. Financial Deepening in Economic Development. New York: Oxford University Press, 1973
  4. Jump up^ McKinnon, Ronald I. Money and Capital in Economic Development. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1973
  5. ^ Jump up to:a b c Carmen M. Reinhart and M. Belen Sbrancia, “The Liquidation of Government Debt”, IMF, 2011, p. 19
  6. Jump up^ Reinhart, Carmen M. and Rogoff, Kenneth S., This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2008, p. 143
  7. Jump up^ Bill Gross, “The Caine Mutiny Part 2”, PIMCO
  8. Jump up^ Giovannini, Alberto and de Melo, Martha, “Government Revenue from Financial Repression”, The American Economic Review, Vol. 83, No. 4 Sep. 1993 (pp. 953-963)
  9. Jump up^ “The great repression”. The Economist. 16 June 2011.
  10. ^ Jump up to:a b “Financial Repression 101”. Allianz Global Investors. Retrieved 2 December 2014.
  11. Jump up^ Gillian Tett, “Policymakers learn a new and alarming catchphrase”, Financial Times, May 9, 2011
  12. Jump up^ Amerman, Daniel (September 12, 2011). “The 2nd Edge of Modern Financial Repression: Manipulating Inflation Indexes to Steal from Retirees & Public Wor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_repression

Federal funds rate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

10 year treasury compared to the Federal Funds Rate

Federal funds rate and capacity utilization in manufacturing.

In the United States, the federal funds rate is the interest rate at which depository institutions (banks and credit unions) lend reserve balances to other depository institutions overnight, on an uncollateralized basis. Reserve balances are amounts held at the Federal Reserve to maintain depository institutions’ reserve requirements. Institutions with surplus balances in their accounts lend those balances to institutions in need of larger balances. The federal funds rate is an important benchmark in financial markets.[1][2]

The interest rate that the borrowing bank pays to the lending bank to borrow the funds is negotiated between the two banks, and the weighted average of this rate across all such transactions is the federal funds effective rate.

The federal funds target rate is determined by a meeting of the members of the Federal Open Market Committee which normally occurs eight times a year about seven weeks apart. The committee may also hold additional meetings and implement target rate changes outside of its normal schedule.

The Federal Reserve uses open market operations to influence the supply of money in the U.S. economy[3] to make the federal funds effective rate follow the federal funds target rate.

Mechanism

Financial Institutions are obligated by law to maintain certain levels of reserves, either as reserves with the Fed or as vault cash. The level of these reserves is determined by the outstanding assets and liabilities of each depository institution, as well as by the Fed itself, but is typically 10%[4] of the total value of the bank’s demand accounts (depending on bank size). In the range of $9.3 million to $43.9 million, for transaction deposits (checking accounts, NOWs, and other deposits that can be used to make payments) the reserve requirement in 2007-2008 was 3 percent of the end-of-the-day daily average amount held over a two-week period. Transaction deposits over $43.9 million held at the same depository institution carried a 10 percent reserve requirement.

For example, assume a particular U.S. depository institution, in the normal course of business, issues a loan. This dispenses money and decreases the ratio of bank reserves to money loaned. If its reserve ratio drops below the legally required minimum, it must add to its reserves to remain compliant with Federal Reserve regulations. The bank can borrow the requisite funds from another bank that has a surplus in its account with the Fed. The interest rate that the borrowing bank pays to the lending bank to borrow the funds is negotiated between the two banks, and the weighted average of this rate across all such transactions is the federal funds effective rate.

The nominal rate is a target set by the governors of the Federal Reserve, which they enforce by open market operations and adjusting the interest paid on required and excess reserve balances. That nominal rate is almost always what is meant by the media referring to the Federal Reserve “changing interest rates.” The actual federal funds rate generally lies within a range of that target rate, as the Federal Reserve cannot set an exact value through open market operations.

Another way banks can borrow funds to keep up their required reserves is by taking a loan from the Federal Reserve itself at the discount window. These loans are subject to audit by the Fed, and the discount rate is usually higher than the federal funds rate. Confusion between these two kinds of loans often leads to confusion between the federal funds rate and the discount rate. Another difference is that while the Fed cannot set an exact federal funds rate, it does set the specific discount rate.

The federal funds rate target is decided by the governors at Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meetings. The FOMC members will either increase, decrease, or leave the rate unchanged depending on the meeting’s agenda and the economic conditions of the U.S. It is possible to infer the market expectations of the FOMC decisions at future meetings from the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) Fed Funds futures contracts, and these probabilities are widely reported in the financial media.

Applications

Interbank borrowing is essentially a way for banks to quickly raise money. For example, a bank may want to finance a major industrial effort but may not have the time to wait for deposits or interest (on loan payments) to come in. In such cases the bank will quickly raise this amount from other banks at an interest rate equal to or higher than the Federal funds rate.

Raising the federal funds rate will dissuade banks from taking out such inter-bank loans, which in turn will make cash that much harder to procure. Conversely, dropping the interest rates will encourage banks to borrow money and therefore invest more freely.[5] This interest rate is used as a regulatory tool to control how freely the U.S. economy operates.

By setting a higher discount rate the Federal Bank discourages banks from requisitioning funds from the Federal Bank, yet positions itself as a lender of last resort.

Comparison with LIBOR

Though the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and the federal funds rate are concerned with the same action, i.e. interbank loans, they are distinct from one another, as follows:

  • The target federal funds rate is a target interest rate that is set by the FOMC for implementing U.S. monetary policies.
  • The (effective) federal funds rate is achieved through open market operations at the Domestic Trading Desk at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York which deals primarily in domestic securities (U.S. Treasury and federal agencies’ securities).[6]
  • LIBOR is based on a questionnaire where a selection of banks guess the rates at which they could borrow money from other banks.
  • LIBOR may or may not be used to derive business terms. It is not fixed beforehand and is not meant to have macroeconomic ramifications.[7]

Predictions by the market

Considering the wide impact a change in the federal funds rate can have on the value of the dollar and the amount of lending going to new economic activity, the Federal Reserve is closely watched by the market. The prices of Option contracts on fed funds futures (traded on the Chicago Board of Trade) can be used to infer the market’s expectations of future Fed policy changes. Based on CME Group 30-Day Fed Fund futures prices, which have long been used to express the market’s views on the likelihood of changes in U.S. monetary policy, the CME Group FedWatch tool allows market participants to view the probability of an upcoming Fed Rate hike. One set of such implied probabilities is published by the Cleveland Fed.

Historical rates

As of December 16, 2008, the most recent change the FOMC has made to the funds target rate is a 75 to 100 basis point cut from 1.0% to a range of zero to 0.25%. According to Jack A. Ablin, chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank, one reason for this unprecedented move of having a range, rather than a specific rate, was because a rate of 0% could have had problematic implications for money market funds, whose fees could then outpace yields.[8] This followed the 50 basis point cut on October 29, 2008, and the unusually large 75 basis point cut made during a special January 22, 2008 meeting, as well as a 50 basis point cut on January 30, 2008, a 75 basis point cut on March 18, 2008, and a 50 basis point cut on October 8, 2008.[9]

Federal funds rate history and recessions.png

Explanation of federal funds rate decisions

When the Federal Open Market Committee wishes to reduce interest rates they will increase the supply of money by buying government securities. When additional supply is added and everything else remains constant, price normally falls. The price here is the interest rate (cost of money) and specifically refers to the Federal Funds Rate. Conversely, when the Committee wishes to increase the Fed Funds Rate, they will instruct the Desk Manager to sell government securities, thereby taking the money they earn on the proceeds of those sales out of circulation and reducing the money supply. When supply is taken away and everything else remains constant, price (or in this case interest rates) will normally rise.[10]

The Federal Reserve has responded to a potential slow-down by lowering the target federal funds rate during recessions and other periods of lower growth. In fact, the Committee’s lowering has recently predated recessions,[9] in order to stimulate the economy and cushion the fall. Reducing the Fed Funds Rate makes money cheaper, allowing an influx of credit into the economy through all types of loans.

The charts linked below show the relation between S&P 500 and interest rates.

  • July 13, 1990 — Sept 4, 1992: 8.00%–3.00% (Includes 1990–1991 recession)[11][12]
  • Feb 1, 1995 — Nov 17, 1998: 6.00–4.75 [13][14][15]
  • May 16, 2000 — June 25, 2003: 6.50–1.00 (Includes 2001 recession)[16][17][18]
  • June 29, 2006 — (Oct. 29 2008): 5.25–1.00[19]
  • Dec 16, 2008 — 0.0–0.25[20]
  • Dec 16, 2015 — 0.25-0.50[21]
  • Dec 14, 2016 — 0.50-0.75[22]
  • Mar 15, 2017 — 0.75-1.00[23]

Bill Gross of PIMCO suggested that in the prior 15 years ending in 2007, in each instance where the fed funds rate was higher than the nominal GDP growth rate, assets such as stocks and/or housing fell.[24]

See also

References

  1. Jump up^ “Fedpoints: Federal Funds”. Federal Reserve Bank of New York. August 2007. Retrieved 2 October 2011.
  2. Jump up^ “The Implementation of Monetary Policy”. The Federal Reserve System: Purposes & Functions (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Federal Reserve Board. 24 August 2011. p. 4. Retrieved 2 October 2011.
  3. Jump up^ “Monetary Policy, Open Market Operations”. Federal Reserve Bank. 2008-01-30. Retrieved 2008-01-30.
  4. Jump up^ “Reserve Requirements”. Board of Governors of The Federal Reserve System. December 16, 2015.
  5. Jump up^ “Fed funds rate”. Bankrate, Inc. March 2016.
  6. Jump up^ Cheryl L. Edwards (November 1997). Gerard Sinzdak. “Open Market Operations in the 1990s” (PDF). Federal Reserve Bulletin (PDF).
  7. Jump up^ “BBA LIBOR – Frequently asked questions”. British Bankers’ Association. March 21, 2006. Archived from the original on 2007-02-16.
  8. Jump up^ “4:56 p.m. US-Closing Stocks”. Associated Press. December 16, 2008.[dead link]
  9. ^ Jump up to:a b “Historical Changes of the Target Federal Funds and Discount Rates, 1971 to present”. New York Federal Reserve Branch. February 19, 2010. Archived from the original on December 21, 2008.
  10. Jump up^ David Waring (2008-02-19). “An Explanation of How The Fed Moves Interest Rates”. InformedTrades.com. Archived from the original on 2015-05-05. Retrieved 2009-07-20.
  11. Jump up^ “$SPX 1990-06-12 1992-10-04 (rate drop chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  12. Jump up^ “$SPX 1992-08-04 1995-03-01 (rate rise chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  13. Jump up^ “$SPX 1995-01-01 1997-01-01 (rate drop chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  14. Jump up^ “$SPX 1996-12-01 1998-10-17 (rate drop chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  15. Jump up^ “$SPX 1998-09-17 2000-06-16 (rate rise chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  16. Jump up^ “$SPX 2000-04-16 2002-01-01 (rate drop chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  17. Jump up^ “$SPX 2002-01-01 2003-07-25 (rate drop chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  18. Jump up^ “$SPX 2003-06-25 2006-06-29 (rate rise chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  19. Jump up^ “$SPX 2006-06-29 2008-06-01 (rate drop chart)”. StockCharts.com.
  20. Jump up^ “Press Release”. Board of Governors of The Federal Reserve System. December 16, 2008.
  21. Jump up^ “Open Market Operations”. Board of Governors of The Federal Reserve System. December 16, 2015.
  22. Jump up^ “Decisions Regarding Monetary Policy Implementation”. Board of Governors of The Federal Reserve System.
  23. Jump up^ Cox, Jeff (2017-03-15). “Fed raises rates at March meeting”. CNBC. Retrieved 2017-03-15.
  24. Jump up^ Shaw, Richard (January 7, 2007). “The Bond Yield Curve as an Economic Crystal Ball”. Retrieved 3 April 2011.

External links

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_funds_rate

Monetary policy of the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from U.S. monetary policy)
United States M2 money supply
% change in money supply
Money supply changes monthly basis

Monetary policy concerns the actions of a central bank or other regulatory authorities that determine the size and rate of growth of the money supply.

In the United States, the Federal Reserve is in charge of monetary policy, and implements it primarily by performing operations that influence short-term interest rates.

Money supply[edit]

Main article: Money supply

The money supply has different components, generally broken down into “narrow” and “broad” money, reflecting the different degrees of liquidity (‘spendability’) of each different type, as broader forms of money can be converted into narrow forms of money (or may be readily accepted as money by others, such as personal checks).[1]

For example, demand deposits are technically promises to pay on demand, while savings deposits are promises to pay subject to some withdrawal restrictions, and Certificates of Deposit are promises to pay only at certain specified dates; each can be converted into money, but “narrow” forms of money can be converted more readily. The Federal Reserve directly controls only the most narrow form of money, physical cash outstanding along with the reserves of banks throughout the country (known as M0 or the monetary base); the Federal Reserve indirectly influences the supply of other types of money.[1]

Broad money includes money held in deposit balances in banks and other forms created in the financial system. Basic economics also teaches that the money supply shrinks when loans are repaid;[2][3] however, the money supply will not necessarily decrease depending on the creation of new loans and other effects. Other than loans, investment activities of commercial banks and the Federal Reserve also increase and decrease the money supply.[4] Discussion of “money” often confuses the different measures and may lead to misguided commentary on monetary policy and misunderstandings of policy discussions.[5]

Structure of modern US institutions[edit]

Federal Reserve[edit]

Monetary policy in the US is determined and implemented by the US Federal Reserve System, commonly referred to as the Federal Reserve. Established in 1913 by the Federal Reserve Act to provide central banking functions,[6] the Federal Reserve System is a quasi-public institution. Ostensibly, the Federal Reserve Banks are 12 private banking corporations;[7][8][9] they are independent in their day-to-day operations, but legislatively accountable to Congress through the auspices of Federal Reserve Board of Governors.

The Board of Governors is an independent governmental agency consisting of seven officials and their support staff of over 1800 employees headquartered in Washington, D.C.[10] It is independent in the sense that the Board currently operates without official obligation to accept the requests or advice of any elected official with regard to actions on the money supply,[11]and its methods of funding also preserve independence. The Governors are nominated by the President of the United States, and nominations must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.[12]

The presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks are nominated by each bank’s respective Board of Directors, but must also be approved by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board is generally considered to have the most important position, followed by the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.[12] The Federal Reserve System is primarily funded by interest collected on their portfolio of securities from the US Treasury, and the Fed has broad discretion in drafting its own budget,[13] but, historically, nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects is rebated to the government each year.[14]

The Federal Reserve has three main mechanisms for manipulating the money supply. It can buy or sell treasury securities. Selling securities has the effect of reducing the monetary base (because it accepts money in return for purchase of securities), taking that money out of circulation. Purchasing treasury securities increases the monetary base (because it pays out hard currency in exchange for accepting securities). Secondly, the discount rate can be changed. And finally, the Federal Reserve can adjust the reserve requirement, which can affect the money multiplier; the reserve requirement is adjusted only infrequently, and was last adjusted in 1992.[15]

In practice, the Federal Reserve uses open market operations to influence short-term interest rates, which is the primary tool of monetary policy. The federal funds rate, for which the Federal Open Market Committee announces a target on a regular basis, reflects one of the key rates for interbank lending. Open market operations change the supply of reserve balances, and the federal funds rate is sensitive to these operations.[16]

In theory, the Federal Reserve has unlimited capacity to influence this rate, and although the federal funds rate is set by banks borrowing and lending funds to each other, the federal funds rate generally stays within a limited range above and below the target (as participants are aware of the Fed’s power to influence this rate).

Assuming a closed economy, where foreign capital or trade does not affect the money supply, when money supply increases, interest rates go down. Businesses and consumers have a lower cost of capital and can increase spending and capital improvement projects. This encourages short-term growth. Conversely, when the money supply falls, interest rates go up, increasing the cost of capital and leading to more conservative spending and investment. The Federal reserve increases interest rates to combat Inflation.

U.S. Treasury[edit]

Private commercial banks[edit]

When money is deposited in a bank, it can then be lent out to another person. If the initial deposit was $100 and the bank lends out $100 to another customer the money supply has increased by $100. However, because the depositor can ask for the money back, banks have to maintain minimum reserves to service customer needs. If the reserve requirement is 10% then, in the earlier example, the bank can lend $90 and thus the money supply increases by only $90. The reserve requirement therefore acts as a limit on this multiplier effect. Because the reserve requirement only applies to the more narrow forms of money creation (corresponding to M1), but does not apply to certain types of deposits (such as time deposits), reserve requirements play a limited role in monetary policy.[17]

Money creation[edit]

Main article: Money creation

Currently, the US government maintains over US$800 billion in cash money (primarily Federal Reserve Notes) in circulation throughout the world,[18][19] up from a sum of less than $30 billion in 1959. Below is an outline of the process which is currently used to control the amount of money in the economy. The amount of money in circulation generally increases to accommodate money demanded by the growth of the country’s production. The process of money creation usually goes as follows:

  1. Banks go through their daily transactions. Of the total money deposited at banks, significant and predictable proportions often remain deposited, and may be referred to as “core deposits.” Banks use the bulk of “non-moving” money (their stable or “core” deposit base) by loaning it out.[20] Banks have a legal obligation to keep a certain fraction of bank deposit money on-hand at all times.[21]
  2. In order to raise additional money to cover excess spending, Congress increases the size of the National Debt by issuing securities typically in the form of a Treasury Bond[22] (see United States Treasury security). It offers the Treasury security for sale, and someone pays cash to the government in exchange. Banks are often the purchasers of these securities, and these securities currently play a crucial role in the process.
  3. The 12-person Federal Open Market Committee, which consists of the heads of the Federal Reserve System (the seven Federal governors and five bank presidents), meets eight times a year to determine how they would like to influence the economy.[23] They create a plan called the country’s “monetary policy” which sets targets for things such as interest rates.[24]
  4. Every business day, the Federal Reserve System engages in Open market operations.[25] If the Federal Reserve wants to increase the money supply, it will buy securities (such as U.S. Treasury Bonds) anonymously from banks in exchange for dollars. If the Federal Reserve wants to decrease the money supply, it will sell securities to the banks in exchange for dollars, taking those dollars out of circulation.[26][27] When the Federal Reserve makes a purchase, it credits the seller’s reserve account (with the Federal Reserve). The money that it deposits into the seller’s account is not transferred from any existing funds, therefore it is at this point that the Federal Reserve has created High-powered money.
  5. By means of open market operations, the Federal Reserve affects the free reserves of commercial banks in the country.[28] Anna Schwartz explains that “if the Federal Reserve increases reserves, a single bank can make loans up to the amount of its excess reserves, creating an equal amount of deposits”.[26][27][29]
  6. Since banks have more free reserves, they may loan out the money, because holding the money would amount to accepting the cost of foregone interest[28][30] When a loan is granted, a person is generally granted the money by adding to the balance on their bank account.[31]
  7. This is how the Federal Reserve’s high-powered money is multiplied into a larger amount of broad money, through bank loans; as written in a particular case study, “as banks increase or decrease loans, the nation’s (broad) money supply increases or decreases.”[3] Once granted these additional funds, the recipient has the option to withdraw physical currency (dollar bills and coins) from the bank, which will reduce the amount of money available for further on-lending (and money creation) in the banking system.[32]
  8. In many cases, account-holders will request cash withdrawals, so banks must keep a supply of cash handy. When they believe they need more cash than they have on hand, banks can make requests for cash with the Federal Reserve. In turn, the Federal Reserve examines these requests and places an order for printed money with the US Treasury Department.[33] The Treasury Department sends these requests to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (to make dollar bills) and the Bureau of the Mint (to stamp the coins).
  9. The U.S. Treasury sells this newly printed money to the Federal Reserve for the cost of printing.[citation needed] This is about 6 cents per bill for any denomination.[34] Aside from printing costs, the Federal Reserve must pledge collateral (typically government securities such as Treasury bonds) to put new money, which does not replace old notes, into circulation.[35]This printed cash can then be distributed to banks, as needed.

Though the Federal Reserve authorizes and distributes the currency printed by the Treasury (the primary component of the narrow monetary base), the broad money supply is primarily created by commercial banks through the money multiplier mechanism.[29][31][36][37] One textbook summarizes the process as follows:

“The Fed” controls the money supply in the United States by controlling the amount of loans made by commercial banks. New loans are usually in the form of increased checking account balances, and since checkable deposits are part of the money supply, the money supply increases when new loans are made …[38]

This type of money is convertible into cash when depositors request cash withdrawals, which will require banks to limit or reduce their lending.[39][32] The vast majority of the broad money supply throughout the world represents current outstanding loans of banks to various debtors.[38][40][41] A very small amount of U.S. currency still exists as “United States Notes“, which have no meaningful economic difference from Federal Reserve notes in their usage, although they departed significantly in their method of issuance into circulation. The currency distributed by the Federal Reserve has been given the official designation of “Federal Reserve Notes.”[42]

Significant effects[edit]

Main article: Monetary policy

In 2005, the Federal Reserve held approximately 9% of the national debt[43] as assets against the liability of printed money. In previous periods, the Federal Reserve has used other debt instruments, such as debt securities issued by private corporations. During periods when the national debt of the United States has declined significantly (such as happened in fiscal years 1999 and 2000), monetary policy and financial markets experts have studied the practical implications of having “too little” government debt: both the Federal Reserve and financial markets use the price information, yield curve and the so-called risk free rate extensively.[44]

Experts are hopeful that other assets could take the place of National Debt as the base asset to back Federal Reserve notes, and Alan Greenspan, long the head of the Federal Reserve, has been quoted as saying, “I am confident that U.S. financial markets, which are the most innovative and efficient in the world, can readily adapt to a paydown of Treasury debt by creating private alternatives with many of the attributes that market participants value in Treasury securities.”[45] In principle, the government could still issue debt securities in significant quantities while having no net debt, and significant quantities of government debt securities are also held by other government agencies.

Although the U.S. government receives income overall from seigniorage, there are costs associated with maintaining the money supply.[41][46] Leading ecological economist and steady-state theorist Herman Daly, claims that “over 95% of our [broad] money supply [in the United States] is created by the private banking system (demand deposits) and bears interest as a condition of its existence,”[41] a conclusion drawn from the Federal Reserve’s ultimate dependence on increased activity in fractional reserve lending when it exercises open market operations.[47]Economist Eric Miller criticizes Daly’s logic because money is created in the banking system in response to demand for the money,[48] which justifies cost.[citation needed]

Thus, use of expansionary open market operations typically generates more debt in the private sector of society (in the form of additional bank deposits).[49] The private banking system charges interest to borrowers as a cost to borrow the money.[3][31][50] The interest costs are borne by those that have borrowed,[3][31] and without this borrowing, open market operations would be unsuccessful in maintaining the broad money supply,[30] though alternative implementations of monetary policy could be used. Depositors of funds in the banking system are paid interest on their savings (or provided other services, such as checking account privileges or physical security for their “cash”), as compensation for “lending” their funds to the bank.

Increases (or contractions) of the money supply corresponds to growth (or contraction) in interest-bearing debt in the country.[3][30][41] The concepts involved in monetary policy may be widely misunderstood in the general public, as evidenced by the volume of literature on topics such as “Federal Reserve conspiracy” and “Federal Reserve fraud.”[51]

Uncertainties

A few of the uncertainties involved in monetary policy decision making are described by the federal reserve:[52]

  • While these policy choices seem reasonably straightforward, monetary policy makers routinely face certain notable uncertainties. First, the actual position of the economy and growth in aggregate demand at any time are only partially known, as key information on spending, production, and prices becomes available only with a lag. Therefore, policy makers must rely on estimates of these economic variables when assessing the appropriate course of policy, aware that they could act on the basis of misleading information. Second, exactly how a given adjustment in the federal funds rate will affect growth in aggregate demand—in terms of both the overall magnitude and the timing of its impact—is never certain. Economic models can provide rules of thumb for how the economy will respond, but these rules of thumb are subject to statistical error. Third, the growth in aggregate supply, often called the growth in potential output, cannot be measured with certainty.
  • In practice, as previously noted, monetary policy makers do not have up-to-the-minute information on the state of the economy and prices. Useful information is limited not only by lags in the collection and availability of key data but also by later revisions, which can alter the picture considerably. Therefore, although monetary policy makers will eventually be able to offset the effects that adverse demand shocks have on the economy, it will be some time before the shock is fully recognized and—given the lag between a policy action and the effect of the action on aggregate demand—an even longer time before it is countered. Add to this the uncertainty about how the economy will respond to an easing or tightening of policy of a given magnitude, and it is not hard to see how the economy and prices can depart from a desired path for a period of time.
  • The statutory goals of maximum employment and stable prices are easier to achieve if the public understands those goals and believes that the Federal Reserve will take effective measures to achieve them.
  • Although the goals of monetary policy are clearly spelled out in law, the means to achieve those goals are not. Changes in the FOMC’s target federal funds rate take some time to affect the economy and prices, and it is often far from obvious whether a selected level of the federal funds rate will achieve those goals.

Opinions of the Federal Reserve

The Federal Reserve is lauded by some economists, while being the target of scathing criticism by other economists, legislators, and sometimes members of the general public. The former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Ben Bernanke, is one of the leading academic critics of the Federal Reserve’s policies during the Great Depression.[53]

Achievements

One of the functions of a central bank is to facilitate the transfer of funds through the economy, and the Federal Reserve System is largely responsible for the efficiency in the banking sector. There have also been specific instances which put the Federal Reserve in the spotlight of public attention. For instance, after the stock market crash in 1987, the actions of the Fed are generally believed to have aided in recovery. Also, the Federal Reserve is credited for easing tensions in the business sector with the reassurances given following the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States.[54]

Criticisms

The Federal Reserve has been the target of various criticisms, involving: accountability, effectiveness, opacity, inadequate banking regulation, and potential market distortion. Federal Reserve policy has also been criticized for directly and indirectly benefiting large banks instead of consumers. For example, regarding the Federal Reserve’s response to the 2007–2010 financial crisis, Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz explained how the U.S. Federal Reserve was implementing another monetary policy —creating currency— as a method to combat the liquidity trap.[55]

By creating $600 billion and inserting this directly into banks the Federal Reserve intended to spur banks to finance more domestic loans and refinance mortgages. However, banks instead were spending the money in more profitable areas by investing internationally in emerging markets. Banks were also investing in foreign currencies which Stiglitz and others point out may lead to currency wars while China redirects its currency holdings away from the United States.[56]

Auditing

The Federal Reserve is subject to different requirements for transparency and audits than other government agencies, which its supporters claim is another element of the Fed’s independence. Although the Federal Reserve has been required by law to publish independently audited financial statements since 1999, the Federal Reserve is not audited in the same way as other government agencies. Some confusion can arise because there are many types of audits, including: investigative or fraud audits; and financial audits, which are audits of accounting statements; there are also compliance, operational, and information system audits.

The Federal Reserve’s annual financial statements are audited by an outside auditor. Similar to other government agencies, the Federal Reserve maintains an Office of the Inspector General, whose mandate includes conducting and supervising “independent and objective audits, investigations, inspections, evaluations, and other reviews of Board programs and operations.”[57] The Inspector General’s audits and reviews are available on the Federal Reserve’s website.[58][59]

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has the power to conduct audits, subject to certain areas of operations that are excluded from GAO audits; other areas may be audited at specific Congressional request, and have included bank supervision, government securities activities, and payment system activities.[60][61] The GAO is specifically restricted any authority over monetary policy transactions;[60] the New York Times reported in 1989 that “such transactions are now shielded from outside audit, although the Fed influences interest rates through the purchase of hundreds of billions of dollars in Treasury securities.”[62] As mentioned above, it was in 1999 that the law governing the Federal Reserve was amended to formalize the already-existing annual practice of ordering independent audits of financial statements for the Federal Reserve Banks and the Board;[63] the GAO’s restrictions on auditing monetary policy continued, however.[61]

Congressional oversight on monetary policy operations, foreign transactions, and the FOMC operations is exercised through the requirement for reports and through semi-annual monetary policy hearings.[61] Scholars have conceded that the hearings did not prove an effective means of increasing oversight of the Federal Reserve, perhaps because “Congresspersons prefer to bash an autonomous and secretive Fed for economic misfortune rather than to share the responsibility for that misfortune with a fully accountable Central Bank,” although the Federal Reserve has also consistently lobbied to maintain its independence and freedom of operation.[64]

Fulfillment of wider economic goals

By law, the goals of the Fed’s monetary policy are: high employment, sustainable growth, and stable prices.[65]

Critics say that monetary policy in the United States has not achieved consistent success in meeting the goals that have been delegated to the Federal Reserve System by Congress. Congress began to review more options with regard to macroeconomic influence beginning in 1946 (after World War II), with the Federal Reserve receiving specific mandates in 1977 (after the country suffered a period of stagflation).

Throughout the period of the Federal Reserve following the mandates, the relative weight given to each of these goals has changed, depending on political developments.[citation needed] In particular, the theories of Keynesianism and monetarism have had great influence on both the theory and implementation of monetary policy, and the “prevailing wisdom” or consensus view of the economic and financial communities has changed over the years.[66]

  • Elastic currency (magnitude of the money multiplier): the success of monetary policy is dependent on the ability to strongly influence the supply of money available to the citizens. If a currency is highly “elastic” (that is, has a higher money multiplier, corresponding to a tendency of the financial system to create more broad money for a given quantity of base money), plans to expand the money supply and accommodate growth are easier to implement. Low elasticity was one of many factors that contributed to the depth of the Great Depression: as banks cut lending, the money multiplier fell, and at the same time the Federal Reserve constricted the monetary base. The depression of the late 1920s is generally regarded as being the worst in the country’s history, and the Federal Reserve has been criticized for monetary policy which worsened the depression.[67] Partly to alleviate problems related to the depression, the United States transitioned from a gold standard and now uses a fiat currency; elasticity is believed to have been increased greatly.[68]

The value of $1 over time, in 1776 dollars.[70]

  • Stable prices – While some economists would regard any consistent inflation as a sign of unstable prices,[71] policymakers could be satisfied with 1 or 2%;[72] the consensus of “price stability” constituting long-run inflation of 1-2% is, however, a relatively recent development, and a change that has occurred at other central banks throughout the world. Inflation has averaged a 4.22% increase annually following the mandates applied in 1977; historic inflation since the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 has averaged 3.4%.[73] In contrast, some research indicates that average inflation for the 250 years before the system was near zero percent, though there were likely sharper upward and downward spikes in that timeframe as compared with more recent times.[74] Central banks in some other countries, notably the German Bundesbank, had considerably better records of achieving price stability drawing on experience from the two episodes of hyperinflation and economic collapse under the country’s previous central bank.

Inflation worldwide has fallen significantly since former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker began his tenure in 1979, a period which has been called the Great Moderation; some commentators attribute this to improved monetary policy worldwide, particularly in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.[75][76]BusinessWeek notes that inflation has been relatively low since mid-1980s[77] and it was during this time that Volcker wrote (in 1995), “It is a sobering fact that the prominence of central banks [such as the Federal Reserve] in this century has coincided with a general tendency towards more inflation, not less. By and large, if the overriding objective is price stability, we did better with the nineteenth-century gold standard and passive central banks, with currency boards, or even with ‘free banking.'”.

  • Sustainable growth – The growth of the economy may not be sustainable as the ability for households to save money has been on an overall decline[78] and household debt is consistently rising.[79]

Cause of The Great Depression

Money supply decreased significantly between Black Tuesday and the Bank Holiday in March 1933 when there were massive bank runs

Monetarists who believe that the Great Depression started as an ordinary recession but significant policy mistakes by monetary authorities (especially the Federal Reserve) caused a shrinking of the money supply which greatly exacerbated the economic situation, causing a recession to descend into the Great Depression.

Public confusion

The Federal Reserve has established a library of information on their websites, however, many experts have spoken about the general level of public confusion that still exists on the subject of the economy; this lack of understanding of macroeconomic questions and monetary policy, however, exists in other countries as well. Critics of the Fed widely regard the system as being “opaque“, and one of the Fed’s most vehement opponents of his time, Congressman Louis T. McFadden, even went so far as to say that “Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its powers….”[80]

There are, on the other hand, many economists who support the need for an independent central banking authority, and some have established websites that aim to clear up confusion about the economy and the Federal Reserve’s operations. The Federal Reserve website itself publishes various information and instructional materials for a variety of audiences.

Criticism of government interference

Some economists, especially those belonging to the heterodox Austrian School, criticize the idea of even establishing monetary policy, believing that it distorts investment. Friedrich Hayek won the Nobel Prize for his elaboration of the Austrian business cycle theory.

Briefly, the theory holds that an artificial injection of credit, from a source such as a central bank like the Federal Reserve, sends false signals to entrepreneurs to engage in long-term investments due to a favorably low interest rate. However, the surge of investments undertaken represents an artificial boom, or bubble, because the low interest rate was achieved by an artificial expansion of the money supply and not by savings. Hence, the pool of real savings and resources have not increased and do not justify the investments undertaken.

These investments, which are more appropriately called “malinvestments”, are realized to be unsustainable when the artificial credit spigot is shut off and interest rates rise. The malinvestments and unsustainable projects are liquidated, which is the recession. The theory demonstrates that the problem is the artificial boom which causes the malinvestments in the first place, made possible by an artificial injection of credit not from savings.

According to Austrian economics, without government intervention, interest rates will always be an equilibrium between the time-preferences of borrowers and savers, and this equilibrium is simply distorted by government intervention. This distortion, in their view, is the cause of the business cycle. Some Austrian economists—but by no means all—also support full reserve banking, a hypothetical financial/banking system where banks may not lend deposits. Others may advocate free banking, whereby the government abstains from any interference in what individuals may choose to use as money or the extent to which banks create money through the deposit and lending cycle.

Reserve requirement

The Federal Reserve regulates banking, and one regulation under its direct control is the reserve requirement which dictates how much money banks must keep in reserves, as compared to its demand deposits. Banks use their observation that the majority of deposits are not requested by the account holders at the same time.

Currently, the Federal Reserve requires that banks keep 10% of their deposits on hand.[81] Some countries have no nationally mandated reserve requirements—banks use their own resources to determine what to hold in reserve, however their lending is typically constrained by other regulations.[82] Other factors being equal, lower reserve percentages increases the possibility of Bank runs, such as the widespread runs of 1931. Low reserve requirements also allow for larger expansions of the money supply by actions of commercial banks—currently the private banking system has created much of the broad money supply of US dollars through lending activity. Monetary policy reform calling for 100% reserves has been advocated by economists such as: Irving Fisher,[83] Frank Knight,[84] many ecological economists along with economists of the Chicago School and Austrian School. Despite calls for reform, the nearly universal practice of fractional-reserve banking has remained in the United States.

Criticism of private sector involvement

Historically and to the present day, various social and political movements (such as social credit) have criticized the involvement of the private sector in “creating money”, claiming that only the government should have the power to “make money”. Some proponents also support full reserve banking or other non-orthodox approaches to monetary policy. Various terminology may be used, including “debt money”, which may have emotive or political connotations. These are generally considered to be akin to conspiracy theories by mainstream economists and ignored in academic literature on monetary policy.

See also

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetary_policy_of_the_United_States

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Non-accelarating Inflation Rate of Unemployment (NAIRU) — Phillips Curve — Money and Inflation — No Real Tradeoff Between Price Increases and Unemployment Rate In The Long Run — States and Nations Cutting Taxes Resulted In Higher Growth and Lower Unemployment — Videos

Posted on March 14, 2017. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Congress, conservatives, Constitution, Corruption, Documentary, Economics, Education, Elections, Employment, Faith, Family, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Freedom, government, High School, history, History of Economic Thought, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, Money, Newspapers, Non-Fiction, People, Philosophy, Photos, Political Correctness, Politics, Radio, Rants, Raves, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Taxation, Taxes, Tutorials, Unemployment, Video, Wealth, Wisdom, Work, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Image result for us history nairu

Image result for value of us dollar 1913 through 1916

Image result for cartoons non-accelerating inflation rate of unemploymentImage result for phillips curve

Image result for non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment

Image result for phillips curve

Image result for phillips curve

NAIRU: What it is and why it matters

The NAIRU.mov

The Phillips Curve – 60 Second Adventures in Economics (3/6)

The Phillips Curve (Macro Review) Macro 3.4

Phillips Curve

Phillips curve | Inflation – measuring the cost of living | Macroeconomics | Khan Academy

Image result for milton friedman nobel prize

Image result for milton friedman

Milton Friedman – Money and Inflation

Milton Friedman: Inflation vs Unemployment

Milton Friedman – Stimulus and Inflation

Milton Friedman – Money and Inflation (Q&A)

TAKE IT TO THE LIMITS: Milton Friedman on Libertarianism

Milton Friedman: There’s No Such Thing as a Free Lunch

The Power of Choice: The Life and Ideas of Milton Friedman

Milton Friedman: Why soaking the rich won’t work.

Milton Friedman – Redistribution of Wealth

Milton Friedman – Socialism is Force

Why Free Markets Work: Milton Friedman on Political Economy (1996)

Image result for robert a mundell economist quotesImage result for robert a mundell

[2013 Shanghai Forum] Robert Mundell “Monetary Unions Free Trade Areas in the World Economy”

Supply-Side Economics: From the Reagan Era to Today. Part 3 – with Paul Gigot and Robert Mundell

‘Europe was always plagued with debt, even before euro’

Robert Mundell Says Italy is Biggest Threat to Euro: Video

Robert Mundell Ph.D – 01=22-86

The Father of Reaganomics and the Euro…

Nobel Prize in Economic 1999 Robert A Mundell

Arthur B. Laffer 2014 ALEC Annual Meeting

Lower Taxes, Higher Revenue

Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share?

EAT THE RICH!

Stephen Moore 2014 ALEC Annual Meeting

NAIRU

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NAIRU is an acronym for non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment,[1] and refers to a level of unemployment below which inflation rises. It was first introduced as NIRU (non-inflationary rate of unemployment) by Franco Modigliani and Lucas Papademos in 1975, as an improvement over the “natural rate of unemployment” concept,[2][3][4] which was proposed earlier by Milton Friedman.[5]

Monetary policy conducted under the assumption of a NAIRU involves allowing just enough unemployment in the economy to prevent inflation rising above a given target figure. Prices are allowed to increase gradually and some unemployment is tolerated.

Contents

 [show] 

Origins

An early form of NAIRU is found in the work of Abba P. Lerner (Lerner 1951, Chapter 14), who referred to it as “low full employment” attained via the expansion of aggregate demand, in contrast with the “high full employment” which adds incomes policies (wage and price controls) to demand stimulation.

The concept arose in the wake of the popularity of the Phillips curve which summarized the observed negative correlation between the rate of unemployment and the rate of inflation (measured as annual nominal wage growth of employees) for number of industrialised countries with more or less mixed economies. This correlation (previously seen for the U.S. by Irving Fisher) persuaded some analysts that it was impossible for governments simultaneously to target both arbitrarily low unemployment and price stability, and that, therefore, it was government’s role to seek a point on the trade-off between unemployment and inflation which matched a domestic social consensus.

During the 1970s in the United States and several other industrialized countries, Phillips curve analysis became less popular, because inflation rose at the same time that unemployment rose (see stagflation).

Worse, as far as many economists were concerned, was that the Phillips curve had little or no theoretical basis. Critics of this analysis (such as Milton Friedman and Edmund Phelps) argued that the Phillips curve could not be a fundamental characteristic of economic general equilibrium because it showed a correlation between a real economic variable (the unemployment rate) and a nominal economic variable (the inflation rate). Their counter-analysis was that government macroeconomic policy (primarily monetary policy) was being driven by a low unemployment target and that this caused expectations of inflation to change, so that steadily accelerating inflation rather than reduced unemployment was the result. The resulting prescription was that government economic policy (or at least monetary policy) should not be influenced by any level of unemployment below a critical level – the “natural rate” or NAIRU.[6]

The natural rate hypothesis

The idea behind the natural rate hypothesis put forward by Friedman was that any given labor market structure must involve a certain amount of unemployment, including frictional unemployment associated with individuals changing jobs and possibly classical unemployment arising from real wages being held above the market-clearing level by minimum wage laws, trade unions or other labour market institutions. Unexpected inflation might allow unemployment to fall below the natural rate by temporarily depressing real wages, but this effect would dissipate once expectations about inflation were corrected. Only with continuously accelerating inflation could rates of unemployment below the natural rate be maintained.

The analysis supporting the natural rate hypothesis was controversial, and empirical evidence suggested that the natural rate varied over time in ways that could not easily be explained by changes in labor market structures. As a result, the “natural rate” terminology was largely supplanted by that of the NAIRU, which referred to a rate of unemployment below which inflation would accelerate, but did not imply a commitment to any particular theoretical explanation, or a prediction that the rate would be stable over time.

Properties

If {\displaystyle U*}U* is the NAIRU and {\displaystyle U}U is the actual unemployment rate, the theory says that:

if {\displaystyle U<U*}U<U* for a few years, inflationary expectations rise, so that the inflation rate tends to increase;
if {\displaystyle U>U*}U>U* for a few years, inflationary expectations fall, so that the inflation rate tends to slow (there is disinflation); and
if {\displaystyle U=U*}U=U*, the inflation rate tends to stay the same, unless there is an exogenous shock.

Okun’s law can be stated as saying that for every one percentage point by which the actual unemployment rate exceeds the so-called “natural” rate of unemployment, real gross domestic product is reduced by 2% to 3%.

Criticism

The NAIRU analysis assumes that if inflation increases, workers and employers can create contracts that take into account expectations of higher inflation and agree on a level of wage inflation that matches the expected level of price inflation to maintain constant real wages. Therefore, the analysis requires inflation to accelerate to maintain low unemployment. However, this argument implicitly assumes that workers and employers cannot contract to incorporate accelerating inflation into wage expectations, but there is no clear justification for assuming that expectations or contract structures are limited in this way aside from the fact that such wage arrangements are not commonly observed.

The NAIRU analysis is especially problematic if the Phillips curve displays hysteresis, that is, if episodes of high unemployment raise the NAIRU.[7] This could happen, for example, if unemployed workers lose skills so that employers prefer to bid up of the wages of existing workers when demand increases, rather than hiring the unemployed.

Others, such as Abba Lerner (1951, 1967) and Hyman Minsky (1965) have argued that a similar effect can be achieved without the human costs of unemployment via a job guarantee, where rather than being unemployed, those who cannot find work in the private sector should be employed by the government. This theory, and the policy of the job guarantee replaces the NAIRU with the NAIBER (non-accelerating-inflation-buffer employment ratio).[8]

Relationship to other economic theories

Most economists do not see the NAIRU theory as explaining all inflation. Instead, it is possible to move along a short run Phillips Curve (even though the NAIRU theory says that this curve shifts in the longer run) so that unemployment can rise or fall due to changes in inflation. Exogenous supply-shock inflation is also possible, as with the “energy crises” of the 1970s or the credit crunch of the early 21st century.

The NAIRU theory was mainly intended as an argument against active Keynesian demand management and in favor of free markets (at least on the macroeconomic level). There is, for instance, no theoretical basis for predicting the NAIRU. Monetarists instead support the generalized assertion that the correct approach to unemployment is through microeconomic measures (to lower the NAIRU whatever its exact level), rather than macroeconomic activity based on an estimate of the NAIRU in relation to the actual level of unemployment. Monetary policy, they maintain, should aim instead at stabilizing the inflation rate.

Naming

The NAIRU, non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment, is actually misnamed. It is the price level that is accelerating (or decelerating), not the inflation rate. The inflation rate is just changing, not accelerating.[9]

See also

References

  1. Jump up^ Coe, David T, Nominal Wages. The NAIRU and Wage Flexibility. (PDF), Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
  2. Jump up^ Modigliani, Franco; Papademos, Lucas (1975). “Targets for Monetary Policy in the Coming Year”. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. The Brookings Institution. 1975 (1): 141–165. doi:10.2307/2534063. JSTOR 2534063.
  3. Jump up^ Robert M. Solow, Modigliani and Monetarism, p. 6.
  4. Jump up^ Snowdon, Brian; Vane, Howard R. (2005). Modern Macroeconomics: Its Origins, Development and Current State. Cheltenham: E. Elgar. p. 187. ISBN 1-84376-394-X.
  5. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton (1968). “The Role of Monetary Policy”. American Economic Review. 58 (1): 1–17. JSTOR 1831652.
  6. Jump up^ Hoover, Kevin D, “Phillips Curve”, The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics, The Library of Economics and Liberty, retrieved 16 July 2007
  7. Jump up^ Ball, Laurence (2009), Hysteresis in Unemployment: Old and New Evidence (PDF)
  8. Jump up^ William Mitchell, J. Muysken (2008), Full employment abandoned: shifting sands and policy failures, Edward Elgar Publishing, ISBN 1-85898-507-2
  9. Jump up^ Case, K.E. and Fair, R.C. and Oster, S.M. (2016). Principles of Macroeconomics. Pearson. ISBN 9780133023671.

Further reading

External links

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAIRU

Phillips curve

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the Phillips curve in supernova astrophysics, see Phillips relationship.

The Phillips curve is a single-equation empirical model, named after A. W. Phillips, describing a historical inverse relationship between rates of unemployment and corresponding rates of inflation that result within an economy. Stated simply, decreased unemployment, (i.e., increased levels of employment) in an economy will correlate with higher rates of inflation.

While there is a short run tradeoff between unemployment and inflation, it has not been observed in the long run.[1] In 1968, Milton Friedman asserted that the Phillips curve was only applicable in the short-run and that in the long-run, inflationary policies will not decrease unemployment.[2][3] Friedman then correctly predicted that, in the 1973–75 recession, both inflation and unemployment would increase.[3] The long-run Phillips curve is now seen as a vertical line at the natural rate of unemployment, where the rate of inflation has no effect on unemployment.[4] Accordingly, the Phillips curve is now seen as too simplistic, with the unemployment rate supplanted by more accurate predictors of inflation based on velocity of moneysupply measures such as the MZM (“money zero maturity”) velocity,[5] which is affected by unemployment in the short but not the long term.[6]

Contents

 [show] 

History

Rate of Change of Wages against Unemployment, United Kingdom 1913–1948 from Phillips (1958)

William Phillips, a New Zealand born economist, wrote a paper in 1958 titled The Relation between Unemployment and the Rate of Change of Money Wage Rates in the United Kingdom, 1861-1957, which was published in the quarterly journal Economica.[7] In the paper Phillips describes how he observed an inverse relationship between money wage changes and unemployment in the British economy over the period examined. Similar patterns were found in other countries and in 1960 Paul Samuelson and Robert Solow took Phillips’ work and made explicit the link between inflation and unemployment: when inflation was high, unemployment was low, and vice versa.[8]

In the 1920s, an American economist Irving Fisher noted this kind of Phillips curve relationship. However, Phillips’ original curve described the behavior of money wages.[9]

In the years following Phillips’ 1958 paper, many economists in the advanced industrial countries believed that his results showed that there was a permanently stable relationship between inflation and unemployment.[citation needed] One implication of this for government policy was that governments could control unemployment and inflation with a Keynesian policy. They could tolerate a reasonably high rate of inflation as this would lead to lower unemployment – there would be a trade-off between inflation and unemployment. For example, monetary policy and/or fiscal policy could be used to stimulate the economy, raising gross domestic product and lowering the unemployment rate. Moving along the Phillips curve, this would lead to a higher inflation rate, the cost of enjoying lower unemployment rates.[citation needed] Economist James Forder argues that this view is historically false and that neither economists nor governments took that view and that the ‘Phillips curve myth’ was an invention of the 1970s.[10]

Since 1974, seven Nobel Prizes have been given to economists for, among other things, work critical of some variations of the Phillips curve. Some of this criticism is based on the United States’ experience during the 1970s, which had periods of high unemployment and high inflation at the same time. The authors receiving those prizes include Thomas Sargent, Christopher Sims, Edmund Phelps, Edward Prescott, Robert A. Mundell, Robert E. Lucas, Milton Friedman, and F.A. Hayek.[11]

Stagflation

In the 1970s, many countries experienced high levels of both inflation and unemployment also known as stagflation. Theories based on the Phillips curve suggested that this could not happen, and the curve came under a concerted attack from a group of economists headed by Milton Friedman.[citation needed] Friedman argued that the Phillips curve relationship was only a short-run phenomenon. In this he followed eight years after Samuelson and Solow [1960] who wrote ” All of our discussion has been phrased in short-run terms, dealing with what might happen in the next few years. It would be wrong, though, to think that our Figure 2 menu that related obtainable price and unemployment behavior will maintain its same shape in the longer run. What we do in a policy way during the next few years might cause it to shift in a definite way.”[8] As Samuelson and Solow had argued 8 years earlier, he argued that in the long run, workers and employers will take inflation into account, resulting in employment contracts that increase pay at rates near anticipated inflation. Unemployment would then begin to rise back to its previous level, but now with higher inflation rates. This result implies that over the longer-run there is no trade-off between inflation and unemployment. This implication is significant for practical reasons because it implies that central banks should not set employment targets above the natural rate.[1]

More recent research has shown that there is a moderate trade-off between low-levels of inflation and unemployment. Work by George Akerlof, William Dickens, and George Perry,[12]implies that if inflation is reduced from two to zero percent, unemployment will be permanently increased by 1.5 percent. This is because workers generally have a higher tolerance for real wage cuts than nominal ones. For example, a worker will more likely accept a wage increase of two percent when inflation is three percent, than a wage cut of one percent when the inflation rate is zero.

Today

U.S. Inflation and Unemployment 1/2000 to 4/2013

Most economists no longer use the Phillips curve in its original form because it was shown to be too simplistic.[6] This can be seen in a cursory analysis of US inflation and unemployment data from 1953–92. There is no single curve that will fit the data, but there are three rough aggregations—1955–71, 1974–84, and 1985–92—each of which shows a general, downwards slope, but at three very different levels with the shifts occurring abruptly. The data for 1953–54 and 1972–73 do not group easily, and a more formal analysis posits up to five groups/curves over the period.[1]

But still today, modified forms of the Phillips Curve that take inflationary expectations into account remain influential. The theory goes under several names, with some variation in its details, but all modern versions distinguish between short-run and long-run effects on unemployment. Modern Phillips curve models include both a short-run Phillips Curve and a long-run Phillips Curve. This is because in the short run, there is generally an inverse relationship between inflation and the unemployment rate; as illustrated in the downward sloping short-run Phillips curve. In the long run, that relationship breaks down and the economy eventually returns to the natural rate of unemployment regardless of the inflation rate.[13]

The “short-run Phillips curve” is also called the “expectations-augmented Phillips curve”, since it shifts up when inflationary expectations rise, Edmund Phelps and Milton Friedman argued. In the long run, this implies that monetary policy cannot affect unemployment, which adjusts back to its “natural rate“, also called the “NAIRU” or “long-run Phillips curve”. However, this long-run “neutrality” of monetary policy does allow for short run fluctuations and the ability of the monetary authority to temporarily decrease unemployment by increasing permanent inflation, and vice versa. The popular textbook of Blanchard gives a textbook presentation of the expectations-augmented Phillips curve.[14]

An equation like the expectations-augmented Phillips curve also appears in many recent New Keynesiandynamic stochastic general equilibrium models. In these macroeconomic models with sticky prices, there is a positive relation between the rate of inflation and the level of demand, and therefore a negative relation between the rate of inflation and the rate of unemployment. This relationship is often called the “New Keynesian Phillips curve.” Like the expectations-augmented Phillips curve, the New Keynesian Phillips curve implies that increased inflation can lower unemployment temporarily, but cannot lower it permanently. Two influential papers that incorporate a New Keynesian Phillips curve are Clarida, Galí, and Gertler (1999),[15] and Blanchard and Galí (2007).[16]

Mathematics

There are at least two different mathematical derivations of the Phillips curve. First, there is the traditional or Keynesian version. Then, there is the new Classical version associated with Robert E. Lucas, Jr.

The traditional Phillips curve

The original Phillips curve literature was not based on the unaided application of economic theory. Instead, it was based on empirical generalizations. After that, economists tried to develop theories that fit the data.

Money wage determination

The traditional Phillips curve story starts with a wage Phillips Curve, of the sort described by A.W. Phillips himself. This describes the rate of growth of money wages (gW). Here and below, the operator g is the equivalent of “the percentage rate of growth of” the variable that follows.

{\displaystyle gW=gW^{T}-f(U)}gW=gW^{{T}}-f(U)

The “money wage rate” (W) is shorthand for total money wage costs per production employee, including benefits and payroll taxes. The focus is on only production workers’ money wages, because (as discussed below) these costs are crucial to pricing decisions by the firms.

This equation tells us that the growth of money wages rises with the trend rate of growth of money wages (indicated by the superscript “T”) and falls with the unemployment rate (U). The function f() is assumed to be monotonically increasing with U so that the dampening of money-wage increases by unemployment is shown by the negative sign in the equation above.

There are several possible stories behind this equation. A major one is that money wages are set by bilateral negotiations under partial bilateral monopoly: as the unemployment rate rises, all else constant worker bargaining power falls, so that workers are less able to increase their wages in the face of employer resistance.

During the 1970s, this story had to be modified, because (as the late Abba Lerner had suggested in the 1940s) workers try to keep up with inflation. Since the 1970s, the equation has been changed to introduce the role of inflationary expectations (or the expected inflation rate, gPex). This produces the expectations-augmented wage Phillips curve:

{\displaystyle gW=gW^{T}-f(U)+\lambda .gP^{ex}.}gW=gW^{{T}}-f(U)+\lambda .gP^{{ex}}.

The introduction of inflationary expectations into the equation implies that actual inflation can feed back into inflationary expectations and thus cause further inflation. The late economist James Tobin dubbed the last term “inflationary inertia,” because in the current period, inflation exists which represents an inflationary impulse left over from the past.

It also involved much more than expectations, including the price-wage spiral. In this spiral, employers try to protect profits by raising their prices and employees try to keep up with inflation to protect their real wages. This process can feed on itself, becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The parameter λ (which is presumed constant during any time period) represents the degree to which employees can gain money wage increases to keep up with expected inflation, preventing a fall in expected real wages. It is usually assumed that this parameter equals unity in the long run.

In addition, the function f() was modified to introduce the idea of the Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment (NAIRU) or what’s sometimes called the “natural” rate of unemployment or the inflation-threshold unemployment rate:

[1] gW = gWTf(UU*) + λ·gPex.

Here, U* is the NAIRU. As discussed below, if U < U*, inflation tends to accelerate. Similarly, if U > U*, inflation tends to slow. It is assumed that f(0) = 0, so that when U = U*, the f term drops out of the equation.

In equation [1], the roles of gWT and gPex seem to be redundant, playing much the same role. However, assuming that λ is equal to unity, it can be seen that they are not. If the trend rate of growth of money wages equals zero, then the case where U equals U* implies that gW equals expected inflation. That is, expected real wages are constant.

In any reasonable economy, however, having constant expected real wages could only be consistent with actual real wages that are constant over the long haul. This does not fit with economic experience in the U.S. or any other major industrial country. Even though real wages have not risen much in recent years, there have been important increases over the decades.

An alternative is to assume that the trend rate of growth of money wages equals the trend rate of growth of average labor productivity (Z). That is:

[2] gWT = gZT.

Under assumption [2], when U equals U* and λ equals unity, expected real wages would increase with labor productivity. This would be consistent with an economy in which actual real wages increase with labor productivity. Deviations of real-wage trends from those of labor productivity might be explained by reference to other variables in the model.

Pricing decisions

Next, there is price behavior. The standard assumption is that markets are imperfectly competitive, where most businesses have some power to set prices. So the model assumes that the average business sets a unit price (P) as a mark-up (M) over the unit labor cost in production measured at a standard rate of capacity utilization (say, at 90 percent use of plant and equipment) and then adds in the unit materials cost.

The standardization involves later ignoring deviations from the trend in labor productivity. For example, assume that the growth of labor productivity is the same as that in the trend and that current productivity equals its trend value:

gZ = gZT and Z = ZT.

The markup reflects both the firm’s degree of market power and the extent to which overhead costs have to be paid. Put another way, all else equal, M rises with the firm’s power to set prices or with a rise of overhead costs relative to total costs.

So pricing follows this equation:

P = M × (unit labor cost) + (unit materials cost)
= M × (total production employment cost)/(quantity of output) + UMC.

UMC is unit raw materials cost (total raw materials costs divided by total output). So the equation can be restated as:

P = M × (production employment cost per worker)/(output per production employee) + UMC.

This equation can again be stated as:

P = M×(average money wage)/(production labor productivity) + UMC
= M×(W/Z) + UMC.

Now, assume that both the average price/cost mark-up (M) and UMC are constant. On the other hand, labor productivity grows, as before. Thus, an equation determining the price inflation rate (gP) is:

gP = gWgZT.

Price[edit]

Then, combined with the wage Phillips curve [equation 1] and the assumption made above about the trend behavior of money wages [equation 2], this price-inflation equation gives us a simple expectations-augmented price Phillips curve:

gP = −f(UU*) + λ·gPex.

Some assume that we can simply add in gUMC, the rate of growth of UMC, in order to represent the role of supply shocks (of the sort that plagued the U.S. during the 1970s). This produces a standard short-term Phillips curve:

gP = −f(UU*) + λ·gPex + gUMC.

Economist Robert J. Gordon has called this the “Triangle Model” because it explains short-run inflationary behavior by three factors: demand inflation (due to low unemployment), supply-shock inflation (gUMC), and inflationary expectations or inertial inflation.

In the long run, it is assumed, inflationary expectations catch up with and equal actual inflation so that gP = gPex. This represents the long-term equilibrium of expectations adjustment. Part of this adjustment may involve the adaptation of expectations to the experience with actual inflation. Another might involve guesses made by people in the economy based on other evidence. (The latter idea gave us the notion of so-called rational expectations.)

Expectational equilibrium gives us the long-term Phillips curve. First, with λ less than unity:

gP = [1/(1 − λ)]·(−f(UU*) + gUMC).

This is nothing but a steeper version of the short-run Phillips curve above. Inflation rises as unemployment falls, while this connection is stronger. That is, a low unemployment rate (less than U*) will be associated with a higher inflation rate in the long run than in the short run. This occurs because the actual higher-inflation situation seen in the short run feeds back to raise inflationary expectations, which in turn raises the inflation rate further. Similarly, at high unemployment rates (greater than U*) lead to low inflation rates. These in turn encourage lower inflationary expectations, so that inflation itself drops again.

This logic goes further if λ is equal to unity, i.e., if workers are able to protect their wages completely from expected inflation, even in the short run. Now, the Triangle Model equation becomes:

f(UU*) = gUMC.

If we further assume (as seems reasonable) that there are no long-term supply shocks, this can be simplified to become:

f(UU*) = 0 which implies that U = U*.

All of the assumptions imply that in the long run, there is only one possible unemployment rate, U* at any one time. This uniqueness explains why some call this unemployment rate “natural.”

To truly understand and criticize the uniqueness of U*, a more sophisticated and realistic model is needed. For example, we might introduce the idea that workers in different sectors push for money wage increases that are similar to those in other sectors. Or we might make the model even more realistic. One important place to look is at the determination of the mark-up, M.

New classical version

The Phillips curve equation can be derived from the (short-run) Lucas aggregate supply function. The Lucas approach is very different from that the traditional view. Instead of starting with empirical data, he started with a classical economic model following very simple economic principles.

Start with the aggregate supply function:

{\displaystyle Y=Y_{n}+a(P-P_{e})\,}Y=Y_{n}+a(P-P_{e})\,

where Y is log value of the actual output, Yn is log value of the “natural” level of output, a is a positive constant, P is log value of the actual price level, and Pe is log value of the expected price level. Lucas assumes that Yn has a unique value.

Note that this equation indicates that when expectations of future inflation (or, more correctly, the future price level) are totally accurate, the last term drops out, so that actual output equals the so-called “natural” level of real GDP. This means that in the Lucas aggregate supply curve, the only reason why actual real GDP should deviate from potential—and the actual unemployment rate should deviate from the “natural” rate—is because of incorrect expectations of what is going to happen with prices in the future. (The idea has been expressed first by Keynes, General Theory, Chapter 20 section III paragraph 4).

This differs from other views of the Phillips curve, in which the failure to attain the “natural” level of output can be due to the imperfection or incompleteness of markets, the stickiness of prices, and the like. In the non-Lucas view, incorrect expectations can contribute to aggregate demand failure, but they are not the only cause. To the “new Classical” followers of Lucas, markets are presumed to be perfect and always attain equilibrium (given inflationary expectations).

We re-arrange the equation into:

{\displaystyle P=P_{e}+{\frac {Y-Y_{n}}{a}}}P=P_{e}+{\frac {Y-Y_{n}}{a}}

Next we add unexpected exogenous shocks to the world supply v:

{\displaystyle P=P_{e}+{\frac {Y-Y_{n}}{a}}+v}P=P_{e}+{\frac {Y-Y_{n}}{a}}+v

Subtracting last year’s price levels P−1 will give us inflation rates, because

{\displaystyle P-P_{-1}\ \approx \pi }P-P_{{-1}}\ \approx \pi

and

{\displaystyle P_{e}-P_{-1}\ \approx \pi _{e}}P_{e}-P_{{-1}}\ \approx \pi _{e}

where π and πe are the inflation and expected inflation respectively.

There is also a negative relationship between output and unemployment (as expressed by Okun’s law). Therefore, using

{\displaystyle {\frac {Y-Y_{n}}{a}}=-b(U-U_{n})}{\frac {Y-Y_{n}}{a}}=-b(U-U_{n})

where b is a positive constant, U is unemployment, and Un is the natural rate of unemployment or NAIRU, we arrive at the final form of the short-run Phillips curve:

{\displaystyle \pi =\pi _{e}-b(U-U_{n})+v\,}\pi =\pi _{e}-b(U-U_{n})+v\,

This equation, plotting inflation rate π against unemployment U gives the downward-sloping curve in the diagram that characterises the Phillips curve.

New Keynesian version

The New Keynesian Phillips curve was originally derived by Roberts in 1995,[17] and since been used in most state-of-the-art New Keynesian DSGE models like the one of Clarida, Galí, and Gertler (2000).[18][19]

{\displaystyle \pi _{t}=\beta E_{t}[\pi _{t+1}]+\kappa y_{t}}\pi _{{t}}=\beta E_{{t}}[\pi _{{t+1}}]+\kappa y_{{t}}

where {\displaystyle \kappa ={\frac {\alpha [1-(1-\alpha )\beta ]\phi }{1-\alpha }}}\kappa ={\frac {\alpha [1-(1-\alpha )\beta ]\phi }{1-\alpha }}. The current expectations of next period’s inflation are incorporated as {\displaystyle \beta E_{t}[\pi _{t+1}]}\beta E_{{t}}[\pi _{{t+1}}]

NAIRU and rational expectations

Short-Run Phillips Curve before and after Expansionary Policy, with Long-Run Phillips Curve (NAIRU)

In the 1970s, new theories, such as rational expectations and the NAIRU (non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment) arose to explain how stagflation could occur. The latter theory, also known as the “natural rate of unemployment“, distinguished between the “short-term” Phillips curve and the “long-term” one. The short-term Phillips Curve looked like a normal Phillips Curve, but shifted in the long run as expectations changed. In the long run, only a single rate of unemployment (the NAIRU or “natural” rate) was consistent with a stable inflation rate. The long-run Phillips Curve was thus vertical, so there was no trade-off between inflation and unemployment. Edmund Phelps won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2006 in part for this. However, the expectations argument was in fact very widely understood before his work on it.[20]

In the diagram, the long-run Phillips curve is the vertical red line. The NAIRU theory says that when unemployment is at the rate defined by this line, inflation will be stable. However, in the short-run policymakers will face an inflation-unemployment rate tradeoff marked by the “Initial Short-Run Phillips Curve” in the graph. Policymakers can therefore reduce the unemployment rate temporarily, moving from point A to point B through expansionary policy. However, according to the NAIRU, exploiting this short-run tradeoff will raise inflation expectations, shifting the short-run curve rightward to the “New Short-Run Phillips Curve” and moving the point of equilibrium from B to C. Thus the reduction in unemployment below the “Natural Rate” will be temporary, and lead only to higher inflation in the long run.

Since the short-run curve shifts outward due to the attempt to reduce unemployment, the expansionary policy ultimately worsens the exploitable tradeoff between unemployment and inflation. That is, it results in more inflation at each short-run unemployment rate. The name “NAIRU” arises because with actual unemployment below it, inflation accelerates, while with unemployment above it, inflation decelerates. With the actual rate equal to it, inflation is stable, neither accelerating nor decelerating. One practical use of this model was to provide an explanation for stagflation, which confounded the traditional Phillips curve.

The rational expectations theory said that expectations of inflation were equal to what actually happened, with some minor and temporary errors. This in turn suggested that the short-run period was so short that it was non-existent: any effort to reduce unemployment below the NAIRU, for example, would immediately cause inflationary expectations to rise and thus imply that the policy would fail. Unemployment would never deviate from the NAIRU except due to random and transitory mistakes in developing expectations about future inflation rates. In this perspective, any deviation of the actual unemployment rate from the NAIRU was an illusion.

However, in the 1990s in the U.S., it became increasingly clear that the NAIRU did not have a unique equilibrium and could change in unpredictable ways. In the late 1990s, the actual unemployment rate fell below 4% of the labor force, much lower than almost all estimates of the NAIRU. But inflation stayed very moderate rather than accelerating. So, just as the Phillips curve had become a subject of debate, so did the NAIRU.

Furthermore, the concept of rational expectations had become subject to much doubt when it became clear that the main assumption of models based on it was that there exists a single (unique) equilibrium in the economy that is set ahead of time, determined independently of demand conditions. The experience of the 1990s suggests that this assumption cannot be sustained.

Theoretical questions

The Phillips curve started as an empirical observation in search of a theoretical explanation.[citation needed] Specifically, the Phillips curve tried to determine whether the inflation-unemployment link was causal or simply correlational. There are several major explanations of the short-term Phillips curve regularity.

To Milton Friedman there is a short-term correlation between inflation shocks and employment. When an inflationary surprise occurs, workers are fooled into accepting lower pay because they do not see the fall in real wages right away. Firms hire them because they see the inflation as allowing higher profits for given nominal wages. This is a movement along the Phillips curve as with change A. Eventually, workers discover that real wages have fallen, so they push for higher money wages. This causes the Phillips curve to shift upward and to the right, as with B. Some research underlines that some implicit and serious assumptions are actually in the background of the Friedmanian Phillips curve. This information asymmetry and a special pattern of flexibility of prices and wages are both necessary if one wants to maintain the mechanism told by Friedman. However, as it is argued, these presumptions remain completely unrevealed and theoretically ungrounded by Friedman.[21]

Economists such as Milton Friedman and Edmund Phelps reject this theory because it implies that workers suffer from money illusion. According to them, rational workers would only react to real wages, that is, inflation adjusted wages. However, one of the characteristics of a modern industrial economy is that workers do not encounter their employers in an atomized and perfect market. They operate in a complex combination of imperfect markets, monopolies, monopsonies, labor unions, and other institutions. In many cases, they may lack the bargaining power to act on their expectations, no matter how rational they are, or their perceptions, no matter how free of money illusion they are. It is not that high inflation causes low unemployment (as in Milton Friedman’s theory) as much as vice versa: Low unemployment raises worker bargaining power, allowing them to successfully push for higher nominal wages. To protect profits, employers raise prices.

Similarly, built-in inflation is not simply a matter of subjective “inflationary expectations” but also reflects the fact that high inflation can gather momentum and continue beyond the time when it was started, due to the objective price/wage spiral.

However, other economists, like Jeffrey Herbener, argue that price is market-determined and competitive firms cannot simply raise prices.[citation needed] They reject the Phillips curve entirely, concluding that unemployment’s influence is only a small portion of a much larger inflation picture that includes prices of raw materials, intermediate goods, cost of raising capital, worker productivity, land, and other factors.

Gordon’s triangle model

Robert J. Gordon of Northwestern University has analyzed the Phillips curve to produce what he calls the triangle model, in which the actual inflation rate is determined by the sum of

  1. demand pull or short-term Phillips curve inflation,
  2. cost push or supply shocks, and
  3. built-in inflation.

The last reflects inflationary expectations and the price/wage spiral. Supply shocks and changes in built-in inflation are the main factors shifting the short-run Phillips Curve and changing the trade-off. In this theory, it is not only inflationary expectations that can cause stagflation. For example, the steep climb of oil prices during the 1970s could have this result.

Changes in built-in inflation follow the partial-adjustment logic behind most theories of the NAIRU:

  1. Low unemployment encourages high inflation, as with the simple Phillips curve. But if unemployment stays low and inflation stays high for a long time, as in the late 1960s in the U.S., both inflationary expectations and the price/wage spiral accelerate. This shifts the short-run Phillips curve upward and rightward, so that more inflation is seen at any given unemployment rate. (This is with shift B in the diagram.)
  2. High unemployment encourages low inflation, again as with a simple Phillips curve. But if unemployment stays high and inflation stays low for a long time, as in the early 1980s in the U.S., both inflationary expectations and the price/wage spiral slow. This shifts the short-run Phillips curve downward and leftward, so that less inflation is seen at each unemployment rate.

In between these two lies the NAIRU, where the Phillips curve does not have any inherent tendency to shift, so that the inflation rate is stable. However, there seems to be a range in the middle between “high” and “low” where built-in inflation stays stable. The ends of this “non-accelerating inflation range of unemployment rates” change over time.

Joke article

In 2008, Gregor Smith published a joke article in the prestigious Journal of Money, Credit and Banking titled “Japan’s Phillips Curve Looks Like Japan”. This article points out the uncanny resemblance between Japan’s Phillips curve and the country’s geographic shape.[22]

See also

References

  1. ^ Jump up to:a b c Chang, R. (1997) “Is Low Unemployment Inflationary?” Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Economic Review 1Q97:4-13
  2. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton (1968). “The role of monetary policy”. American Economic Review. 68 (1): 1–17. JSTOR 1831652.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b Phelan, John (23 October 2012). “Milton Friedman and the rise and fall of the Phillips Curve”. thecommentator.com. Retrieved September 29, 2014.
  4. Jump up^ “Phillips Curve: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics – Library of Economics and Liberty”.
  5. Jump up^ “Velocity of MZM Money Stock”. 22 December 2016.
  6. ^ Jump up to:a b Oliver Hossfeld (2010) “US Money Demand, Monetary Overhang, and Inflation Prediction” International Network for Economic Research working paper no. 2010.4
  7. Jump up^ Phillips, A. W. (1958). “The Relationship between Unemployment and the Rate of Change of Money Wages in the United Kingdom 1861-1957”. Economica. 25 (100): 283–299. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0335.1958.tb00003.x.
  8. ^ Jump up to:a b Samuelson, Paul A.; Solow, Robert M. (1960). “Analytical Aspects of Anti-Inflation Policy”. American Economic Review. 50 (2): 177–194. JSTOR 1815021.
  9. Jump up^ Fisher, Irving (1973). “I discovered the Phillips curve: ‘A statistical relation between unemployment and price changes'”. Journal of Political Economy. The University of Chicago Press. 81 (2): 496–502. doi:10.1086/260048. JSTOR 1830534. Reprinted from 1926 edition of International Labour Review.
  10. Jump up^ Forder, James (2014). Macroeconomics and the Phillips Curve Myth. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-968365-9.
  11. Jump up^ Domitrovic, Brain (10 October 2011). “The Economics Nobel Goes to Sargent & Sims: Attackers of the Phillips Curve”. Forbes.com. Retrieved 12 October 2011.
  12. Jump up^ Akerlof, George A.; Dickens, William T.; Perry, George L. (2000). “Near-Rational Wage and Price Setting and the Long-Run Phillips Curve”. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 2000 (1): 1–60.
  13. Jump up^ Jacob, Reed (2016). “AP Macroeconomics Review: Phillips Curve”. APEconReview.com.
  14. Jump up^ Blanchard, Olivier (2000). Macroeconomics (Second ed.). Prentice Hall. pp. 149–55. ISBN 0-13-013306-X.
  15. Jump up^ Clarida, Richard; Galí, Jordi; Gertler, Mark (1999). “The science of monetary policy: a New-Keynesian perspective”. Journal of Economic Literature. American Economic Association. 37 (4): 1661–1707. doi:10.1257/jel.37.4.1661. JSTOR 2565488.
  16. Jump up^ Blanchard, Olivier; Galí, Jordi (2007). “Real Wage Rigidities and the New Keynesian Model”. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking. 39 (s1): 35–65. doi:10.1111/j.1538-4616.2007.00015.x.
  17. Jump up^ Roberts, John M. (1995). “New Keynesian Economics and the Phillips Curve”. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking. 27 (4): 975–984. JSTOR 2077783.
  18. Jump up^ Clarida, Richard; Galí, Jordi; Gertler, Mark (2000). “Monetary Policy Rules and Macroeconomic Stability: Evidence and Some Theory”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 115 (1): 147–180. doi:10.1162/003355300554692.
  19. Jump up^ Romer, David (2012). “Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Models of Fluctuation”. Advanced Macroeconomics. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. pp. 312–364. ISBN 978-0-07-351137-5.
  20. Jump up^ Forder, James (2010). “The historical place of the ‘Friedman-Phelps’ expectations critique”. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought. 17 (3): 493–511. doi:10.1080/09672560903114875.
  21. Jump up^ Galbács, Peter (2015). The Theory of New Classical Macroeconomics. A Positive Critique. Heidelberg/New York/Dordrecht/London: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-17578-2. ISBN 978-3-319-17578-2.
  22. Jump up^ Smith, Gregor W. (1 September 2008). “Japan’s Phillips Curve Looks Like Japan”. 40 (6): 1325–1326. doi:10.1111/j.1538-4616.2008.00160.x – via Wiley Online Library.

Further reading

External links

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_curve

Milton Friedman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Milton friedman)
Milton Friedman
Portrait of Milton Friedman.jpg

Friedman in 2004
Born July 31, 1912
Brooklyn, New York, U.S.
Died November 16, 2006 (aged 94)
San Francisco, California, U.S.
Nationality American
Spouse(s) Rose Friedman
Institution
School or
tradition
Chicago School
Alma mater
Doctoral
advisor
Simon Kuznets
Doctoral
students
Phillip Cagan
Harry Markowitz
Lester G. Telser[1]
David I. Meiselman
Neil Wallace
Miguel Sidrauski
Influences
Influenced
Contributions
Awards
Information at IDEAS / RePEc
Signature
Milton friedman signature.svg
Notes

Milton Friedman (July 31, 1912 – November 16, 2006) was an American economist who received the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his research on consumption analysis, monetary history and theory, and the complexity of stabilization policy.[4] With George Stigler and others, Friedman was among the intellectual leaders of the second generation of Chicago price theory, a methodological movement at the University of Chicago’s Department of Economics, Law School, and Graduate School of Business from the 1940s onward. Several students and young professors that were recruited or mentored by Friedman at Chicago went on to become leading economists; they include Gary Becker, Robert Fogel, Thomas Sowell,[5] and Robert Lucas, Jr.[6]

Friedman’s challenges to what he later called “naive Keynesian” theory[7] began with his 1950s reinterpretation of the consumption function. In the 1960s, he became the main advocate opposing Keynesian government policies,[8] and described his approach (along with mainstream economics) as using “Keynesian language and apparatus” yet rejecting its “initial” conclusions.[9] He theorized that there existed a “natural” rate of unemployment, and argued that employment above this rate would cause inflation to accelerate.[10] He argued that the Phillips curve was, in the long run, vertical at the “natural rate” and predicted what would come to be known as stagflation.[11] Friedman promoted an alternative macroeconomic viewpoint known as “monetarism“, and argued that a steady, small expansion of the money supply was the preferred policy.[12] His ideas concerning monetary policy, taxation, privatization and deregulation influenced government policies, especially during the 1980s. His monetary theory influenced the Federal Reserve’s response to the global financial crisis of 2007–08.[13]

Friedman was an advisor to Republican U.S. President Ronald Reagan[14] and Conservative British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.[15] His political philosophy extolled the virtues of a free market economic system with minimal intervention. He once stated that his role in eliminating U.S. conscription was his proudest accomplishment. In his 1962 book Capitalism and Freedom, Friedman advocated policies such as a volunteer military, freely floating exchange rates, abolition of medical licenses, a negative income tax, and school vouchers.[16] His support for school choice led him to found the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, later renamed EdChoice.[17]

Milton Friedman’s works include many monographs, books, scholarly articles, papers, magazine columns, television programs, and lectures, and cover a broad range of economic topics and public policy issues. His books and essays have had an international influence, including in former communist states.[18][19][20][21] A survey of economists ranked Friedman as the second-most popular economist of the twentieth century after John Maynard Keynes,[22] and The Economist described him as “the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th century … possibly of all of it”.[23]

Contents

 [show] 

Early life

Friedman was born in Brooklyn, New York on July 31, 1912. His parents, Sára Ethel (née Landau) and Jenő Saul Friedman,[24] were Jewish immigrants from Beregszász in Carpathian Ruthenia, Kingdom of Hungary (now Berehove in Ukraine). They both worked as dry goods merchants. Shortly after Milton’s birth, the family relocated to Rahway, New Jersey. In his early teens, Friedman was injured in a car accident, which scarred his upper lip.[25] A talented student, Friedman graduated from Rahway High School in 1928, just before his 16th birthday.[26][27]

In 1932, Friedman graduated from Rutgers University, where he specialized in mathematics and economics and initially intended to become an actuary. During his time at Rutgers, Friedman became influenced by two economics professors, Arthur F. Burns and Homer Jones, who convinced him that modern economics could help end the Great Depression.

After graduating from Rutgers, Friedman was offered two scholarships to do graduate work—one in mathematics at Brown University and the other in economics at the University of Chicago.[28] Friedman chose the latter, thus earning a Master of Arts degree in 1933. He was strongly influenced by Jacob Viner, Frank Knight, and Henry Simons. It was at Chicago that Friedman met his future wife, economist Rose Director. During the 1933–1934 academic year he had a fellowship at Columbia University, where he studied statistics with renowned statistician and economist Harold Hotelling. He was back in Chicago for the 1934–1935 academic year, working as a research assistant for Henry Schultz, who was then working on Theory and Measurement of Demand. That year, Friedman formed what would prove to be lifelong friendships with George Stigler and W. Allen Wallis.[29]

Public service

Friedman was initially unable to find academic employment, so in 1935 he followed his friend W. Allen Wallis to Washington, where Franklin D. Roosevelt‘s New Deal was “a lifesaver” for many young economists.[30] At this stage, Friedman said that he and his wife “regarded the job-creation programs such as the WPA, CCC, and PWA appropriate responses to the critical situation,” but not “the price- and wage-fixing measures of the National Recovery Administration and the Agricultural Adjustment Administration.”[31] Foreshadowing his later ideas, he believed price controls interfered with an essential signaling mechanism to help resources be used where they were most valued. Indeed, Friedman later concluded that all government intervention associated with the New Deal was “the wrong cure for the wrong disease,” arguing that the money supply should simply have been expanded, instead of contracted.[32] Later, Friedman and his colleague Anna Schwartz wrote A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960, which argued that the Great Depression was caused by a severe monetary contraction due to banking crises and poor policy on the part of the Federal Reserve.[33]

During 1935, he began work for the National Resources Committee, which was then working on a large consumer budget survey. Ideas from this project later became a part of his Theory of the Consumption Function. Friedman began employment with the National Bureau of Economic Research during autumn 1937 to assist Simon Kuznets in his work on professional income. This work resulted in their jointly authored publication Incomes from Independent Professional Practice, which introduced the concepts of permanent and transitory income, a major component of the Permanent Income Hypothesis that Friedman worked out in greater detail in the 1950s. The book hypothesizes that professional licensing artificially restricts the supply of services and raises prices.

During 1940, Friedman was appointed an assistant professor teaching Economics at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, but encountered antisemitism in the Economics department and decided to return to government service.[34][35] From 1941 to 1943 Friedman worked on wartime tax policy for the Federal Government, as an advisor to senior officials of the United States Department of the Treasury. As a Treasury spokesman during 1942 he advocated a Keynesian policy of taxation. He helped to invent the payroll withholding tax system, since the federal government badly needed money in order to fight the war.[36] He later said, “I have no apologies for it, but I really wish we hadn’t found it necessary and I wish there were some way of abolishing withholding now.”[37]

Academic career

Early years

In 1940, Friedman accepted a position at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, but left because of differences with faculty regarding United States involvement in World War II. Friedman believed the United States should enter the war.[38] In 1943, Friedman joined the Division of War Research at Columbia University (headed by W. Allen Wallis and Harold Hotelling), where he spent the rest of World War II working as a mathematical statistician, focusing on problems of weapons design, military tactics, and metallurgical experiments.[38][39]

In 1945, Friedman submitted Incomes from Independent Professional Practice (co-authored with Kuznets and completed during 1940) to Columbia as his doctoral dissertation. The university awarded him a PhD in 1946. Friedman spent the 1945–1946 academic year teaching at the University of Minnesota (where his friend George Stigler was employed). On February 12, 1945, his son, David D. Friedman was born.

University of Chicago

In 1946, Friedman accepted an offer to teach economic theory at the University of Chicago (a position opened by departure of his former professor Jacob Viner to Princeton University). Friedman would work for the University of Chicago for the next 30 years. There he contributed to the establishment of an intellectual community that produced a number of Nobel Prize winners, known collectively as the Chicago school of economics.

At that time, Arthur F. Burns, who was then the head of the National Bureau of Economic Research, asked Friedman to rejoin the Bureau’s staff. He accepted the invitation, and assumed responsibility for the Bureau’s inquiry into the role of money in the business cycle. As a result, he initiated the “Workshop in Money and Banking” (the “Chicago Workshop”), which promoted a revival of monetary studies. During the latter half of the 1940s, Friedman began a collaboration with Anna Schwartz, an economic historian at the Bureau, that would ultimately result in the 1963 publication of a book co-authored by Friedman and Schwartz, A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960.

Friedman spent the 1954–1955 academic year as a Fulbright Visiting Fellow at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. At the time, the Cambridge economics faculty was divided into a Keynesian majority (including Joan Robinson and Richard Kahn) and an anti-Keynesian minority (headed by Dennis Robertson). Friedman speculated that he was invited to the fellowship, because his views were unacceptable to both of the Cambridge factions. Later his weekly columns for Newsweek magazine (1966–84) were well read and increasingly influential among political and business people.[40] From 1968 to 1978, he and Paul Samuelson participated in the Economics Cassette Series, a biweekly subscription series where the economist would discuss the days’ issues for about a half-hour at a time.[41][42]

Friedman was an economic adviser to Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater during 1964.

Personal life

Retirement

In 1977, at the age of 65, Friedman retired from the University of Chicago after teaching there for 30 years. He and his wife moved to San Francisco where he became a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. From 1977 on, he was affiliated with the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. During the same year, Friedman was approached by the Free To Choose Network and asked to create a television program presenting his economic and social philosophy.

The Friedmans worked on this project for the next three years, and during 1980, the ten-part series, titled Free to Choose, was broadcast by the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). The companion book to the series (co-authored by Milton and his wife, Rose Friedman), also titled Free To Choose, was the bestselling nonfiction book of 1980 and has since been translated into 14 foreign languages.

Friedman served as an unofficial adviser to Ronald Reagan during his 1980 presidential campaign, and then served on the President’s Economic Policy Advisory Board for the rest of the Reagan Administration. Ebenstein says Friedman was “the ‘guru’ of the Reagan administration.”[43] In 1988 he received the National Medal of Science and Reagan honored him with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Milton Friedman is known now as one of the most influential economists of the 20th century.[44][45] Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Friedman continued to write editorials and appear on television. He made several visits to Eastern Europe and to China, where he also advised governments. He was also for many years a Trustee of the Philadelphia Society.[46][47][48]

Later life

According to a 2007 article in Commentary magazine, his “parents were moderately observant [Jews], but Friedman, after an intense burst of childhood piety, rejected religion altogether.”[49] He described himself as an agnostic.[50] Friedman wrote extensively of his life and experiences, especially in 1998 in his memoirs with his wife Rose, titled Two Lucky People.

Death

Friedman died of heart failure at the age of 94 years in San Francisco on November 16, 2006.[51] He was still a working economist performing original economic research; his last column was published in The Wall Street Journal the day after his death.[52] He was survived by his wife (who died on August 18, 2009) and their two children, David, known for the anarcho-capitalist book The Machinery of Freedom, and Janet.

Scholarly contributions

Economics

Friedman was best known for reviving interest in the money supply as a determinant of the nominal value of output, that is, the quantity theory of money. Monetarism is the set of views associated with modern quantity theory. Its origins can be traced back to the 16th-century School of Salamanca or even further; however, Friedman’s contribution is largely responsible for its modern popularization. He co-authored, with Anna Schwartz, A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960 (1963), which was an examination of the role of the money supply and economic activity in the U.S. history. A striking conclusion of their research regarded the way in which money supply fluctuations contribute to economic fluctuations. Several regression studies with David Meiselman during the 1960s suggested the primacy of the money supply over investment and government spending in determining consumption and output. These challenged a prevailing, but largely untested, view on their relative importance. Friedman’s empirical research and some theory supported the conclusion that the short-run effect of a change of the money supply was primarily on output but that the longer-run effect was primarily on the price level.

Friedman was the main proponent of the monetarist school of economics. He maintained that there is a close and stable association between inflation and the money supply, mainly that inflation could be avoided with proper regulation of the monetary base’s growth rate. He famously used the analogy of “dropping money out of a helicopter.”,[53] in order to avoid dealing with money injection mechanisms and other factors that would overcomplicate his models.

Friedman’s arguments were designed to counter the popular concept of cost-push inflation, that the increased general price level at the time was the result of increases in the price of oil, or increases in wages; as he wrote,

Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.

— Milton Friedman, 1963.[54]

Friedman rejected the use of fiscal policy as a tool of demand management; and he held that the government’s role in the guidance of the economy should be restricted severely. Friedman wrote extensively on the Great Depression, which he termed the Great Contraction, arguing that it had been caused by an ordinary financial shock whose duration and seriousness were greatly increased by the subsequent contraction of the money supply caused by the misguided policies of the directors of the Federal Reserve.

The Fed was largely responsible for converting what might have been a garden-variety recession, although perhaps a fairly severe one, into a major catastrophe. Instead of using its powers to offset the depression, it presided over a decline in the quantity of money by one-third from 1929 to 1933 … Far from the depression being a failure of the free-enterprise system, it was a tragic failure of government.

— Milton Friedman, Two Lucky People, 233[55]

Friedman also argued for the cessation of government intervention in currency markets, thereby spawning an enormous literature on the subject, as well as promoting the practice of freely floating exchange rates. His close friend George Stigler explained, “As is customary in science, he did not win a full victory, in part because research was directed along different lines by the theory of rational expectations, a newer approach developed by Robert Lucas, also at the University of Chicago.”[56] The relationship between Friedman and Lucas, or new classical macroeconomics as a whole, was highly complex. The Friedmanian Phillips curve was an interesting starting point for Lucas, but he soon realized that the solution provided by Friedman was not quite satisfactory. Lucas elaborated a new approach in which rational expectations were presumed instead of the Friedmanian adaptive expectations. Due to this reformulation, the story in which the theory of the new classical Phillips curve was embedded radically changed. This modification, however, had a significant effect on Friedman’s own approach, so, as a result, the theory of the Friedmanian Phillips curve also changed.[57] Moreover, new classical Neil Wallace, who was a graduate student at the University of Chicago between 1960 and 1963, regarded Friedman’s theoretical courses as a mess.[58] This evaluation clearly indicates the broken relationship between Friedmanian monetarism and new classical macroeconomics.

Friedman was also known for his work on the consumption function, the permanent income hypothesis (1957), which Friedman himself referred to as his best scientific work.[59] This work contended that rational consumers would spend a proportional amount of what they perceived to be their permanent income. Windfall gains would mostly be saved. Tax reductions likewise, as rational consumers would predict that taxes would have to increase later to balance public finances. Other important contributions include his critique of the Phillips curve and the concept of the natural rate of unemployment (1968). This critique associated his name, together with that of Edmund Phelps, with the insight that a government that brings about greater inflation cannot permanently reduce unemployment by doing so. Unemployment may be temporarily lower, if the inflation is a surprise, but in the long run unemployment will be determined by the frictions and imperfections of the labor market.

Friedman’s essay “The Methodology of Positive Economics” (1953) provided the epistemological pattern for his own subsequent research and to a degree that of the Chicago School. There he argued that economics as science should be free of value judgments for it to be objective. Moreover, a useful economic theory should be judged not by its descriptive realism but by its simplicity and fruitfulness as an engine of prediction. That is, students should measure the accuracy of its predictions, rather than the ‘soundness of its assumptions’. His argument was part of an ongoing debate among such statisticians as Jerzy Neyman, Leonard Savage, and Ronald Fisher.[60]

Statistics

One of his most famous contributions to statistics is sequential sampling. Friedman did statistical work at the Division of War Research at Columbia, where he and his colleagues came up with the technique. It later became, in the words of The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, “the standard analysis of quality control inspection”. The dictionary adds, “Like many of Friedman’s contributions, in retrospect it seems remarkably simple and obvious to apply basic economic ideas to quality control; that however is a measure of his genius.”[61]

Public policy positions

Federal Reserve

Due to its poor performance,[62] Friedman believed that the Federal Reserve Board should be abolished.[63][64] Friedman was deeply critical about Federal Reserve policies, even during the so-called ‘Volcker shock’ that was labelled ‘monetarist.’[65] He further believed that if the money supply was to be centrally controlled (as by the Federal Reserve System) that the preferable way to do it would be with a mechanical system that would keep the quantity of money increasing at a steady rate.

Exchange rates

Friedman was a strong advocate for floating exchange rates throughout the entire Bretton-Woods period. He argued that a flexible exchange rate would make external adjustment possible and allow countries to avoid Balance of Payments crises. He saw fixed exchange rates as an undesirable form of government intervention. The case was articulated in an influential 1953 paper, “The Case for Flexible Exchange Rates”, at a time, when most commentators regarded the possibility of floating exchange rates as a fantasy.[66][67]

School choice

In his 1955 article “The Role of Government in Education”[68] Friedman proposed supplementing publicly operated schools with privately run but publicly funded schools through a system of school vouchers.[69] Reforms similar to those proposed in the article were implemented in, for example, Chile in 1981 and Sweden in 1992.[70] In 1996, Friedman, together with his wife, founded the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice to advocate school choice and vouchers. In 2016, the Friedman Foundation changed its name to EdChoice to honor the Friedmans’ desire to have the educational choice movement live on without their names attached to it after their deaths.[17]

Conscription

While Walter Oi is credited with establishing the economic basis for a volunteer military, Milton Friedman was a proponent, stating that the draft was “inconsistent with a free society.”[71][72] In Capitalism and Freedom, he argued that conscription is inequitable and arbitrary, preventing young men from shaping their lives as they see fit.[73] During the Nixon administration he headed the committee to research a conversion to paid/volunteer armed force. He would later state that his role in eliminating the conscription in the United States was his proudest accomplishment.[12] Friedman did, however, believe a nation could compel military training as a reserve in case of war time.[73]

Foreign policy

Biographer Lanny Ebenstein noted a drift over time in Friedman’s views from an interventionist to a more cautious foreign policy.[74] He supported US involvement in the Second World War and initially supported a hard line against Communism, but moderated over time.[74] He opposed the Gulf War and the Iraq War.[74] In a spring 2006 interview, Friedman said that the USA’s stature in the world had been eroded by the Iraq War, but that it might be improved if Iraq were to become a peaceful independent country.[75]

Libertarianism and the Republican Party

He served as a member of President Reagan’s Economic Policy Advisory Board starting at 1981. In 1988, he received the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the National Medal of Science. He said that he was a libertarian philosophically, but a member of the U.S. Republican Party for the sake of “expediency” (“I am a libertarian with a small ‘l’ and a Republican with a capital ‘R.’ And I am a Republican with a capital ‘R’ on grounds of expediency, not on principle.”) But, he said, “I think the term classical liberal is also equally applicable. I don’t really care very much what I’m called. I’m much more interested in having people thinking about the ideas, rather than the person.”[76]

Public goods and monopoly

Friedman was supportive of the state provision of some public goods that private businesses are not considered as being able to provide. However, he argued that many of the services performed by government could be performed better by the private sector. Above all, if some public goods are provided by the state, he believed that they should not be a legal monopoly where private competition is prohibited; for example, he wrote:

There is no way to justify our present public monopoly of the post office. It may be argued that the carrying of mail is a technical monopoly and that a government monopoly is the least of evils. Along these lines, one could perhaps justify a government post office, but not the present law, which makes it illegal for anybody else to carry the mail. If the delivery of mail is a technical monopoly, no one else will be able to succeed in competition with the government. If it is not, there is no reason why the government should be engaged in it. The only way to find out is to leave other people free to enter.

— Milton Friedman, Friedman, Milton & Rose D. Capitalism and Freedom, University of Chicago Press, 1982, p. 29

Social security, welfare programs, and negative income tax

After 1960 Friedman attacked Social Security from a free market view stating that it had created welfare dependency.[77]

Friedman proposed that if there had to be a welfare system of any kind, he would replace the existing U.S. welfare system with a negative income tax, a progressive tax system in which the poor receive a basic living income from the government.[78] According to the New York Times, Friedman’s views in this regard were grounded in a belief that while “market forces … accomplish wonderful things”, they “cannot ensure a distribution of income that enables all citizens to meet basic economic needs”.[78]

Drug policy

Friedman also supported libertarian policies such as legalization of drugs and prostitution. During 2005, Friedman and more than 500 other economists advocated discussions regarding the economic benefits of the legalization of marijuana.[79]

Gay rights

Friedman was also a supporter of gay rights.[80][81] He never specifically supported same-sex marriage, instead saying “I do not believe there should be any discrimination against gays.”[81]

Economic freedom

Michael Walker of the Fraser Institute and Friedman hosted a series of conferences from 1986 to 1994. The goal was to create a clear definition of economic freedom and a method for measuring it. Eventually this resulted in the first report on worldwide economic freedom, Economic Freedom in the World.[82] This annual report has since provided data for numerous peer-reviewed studies and has influenced policy in several nations.

Along with sixteen other distinguished economists he opposed the Copyright Term Extension Act and filed an amicus brief in Eldred v. Ashcroft.[83] He supported the inclusion of the word “no-brainer” in the brief.[84]

Friedman argued for stronger basic legal (constitutional) protection of economic rights and freedoms to further promote industrial-commercial growth and prosperity and buttress democracy and freedom and the rule of law generally in society.[85]

Honors, recognition, and influence

George H. Nash, a leading historian of American conservatism, says that by, “the end of the 1960s he was probably the most highly regarded and influential conservative scholar in the country, and one of the few with an international reputation.”[86] Friedman allowed the libertarian Cato Institute to use his name for its biannual Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty beginning in 2001. A Friedman Prize was given to the late British economist Peter Bauer in 2002, Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto in 2004, Mart Laar, former Estonian Prime Minister in 2006 and a young Venezuelan student Yon Goicoechea in 2008. His wife Rose, sister of Aaron Director, with whom he initiated the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, served on the international selection committee.[87][88] Friedman was also a recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics.

Upon Friedman’s death, Harvard President Lawrence Summers called him “The Great Liberator” saying “… any honest Democrat will admit that we are now all Friedmanites.” He said Friedman’s great popular contribution was “in convincing people of the importance of allowing free markets to operate.”[89]

In 2013 Stephen Moore, a member of the editorial forward of the Wall Street Journal said, “Quoting the most-revered champion of free-market economics since Adam Smith has become a little like quoting the Bible.” He adds, “There are sometimes multiple and conflicting interpretations.”[90]

Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences

Friedman won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, the sole recipient for 1976, “for his achievements in the fields of consumption analysis, monetary history and theory and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy.”[4]

Hong Kong

Friedman once said, “If you want to see capitalism in action, go to Hong Kong.”[91] He wrote in 1990 that the Hong Kong economy was perhaps the best example of a free market economy.[92]

One month before his death, he wrote the article “Hong Kong Wrong – What would Cowperthwaite say?” in the Wall Street Journal, criticizing Donald Tsang, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, for abandoning “positive noninterventionism.”[93] Tsang later said he was merely changing the slogan to “big market, small government,” where small government is defined as less than 20% of GDP. In a debate between Tsang and his rival, Alan Leong, before the 2007 Chief Executive election, Leong introduced the topic and jokingly accused Tsang of angering Friedman to death.

Chile

Main articles: Miracle of Chile and Chicago Boys

During 1975, two years after the military coup that brought military dictator President Augusto Pinochet to power and ended the government of Salvador Allende, the economy of Chile experienced a severe crisis. Friedman and Arnold Harberger accepted an invitation of a private Chilean foundation to visit Chile and speak on principles of economic freedom.[94] He spent seven days in Chile giving a series of lectures at the Universidad Católica de Chile and the (National) University of Chile. One of the lectures was entitled “The Fragility of Freedom” and according to Friedman, “dealt with precisely the threat to freedom from a centralized military government.”[95]

In an April 21, 1975, letter to Pinochet, Friedman considered the “key economic problems of Chile are clearly … inflation and the promotion of a healthy social market economy“.[96] He stated that “There is only one way to end inflation: by drastically reducing the rate of increase of the quantity of money …” and that “… cutting government spending is by far and away the most desirable way to reduce the fiscal deficit, because it … strengthens the private sector thereby laying the foundations for healthy economic growth”.[96] As to how rapidly inflation should be ended, Friedman felt that “for Chile where inflation is raging at 10–20% a month … gradualism is not feasible. It would involve so painful an operation over so long a period that the patient would not survive.” Choosing “a brief period of higher unemployment…” was the lesser evil.. and that “the experience of Germany, … of Brazil …, of the post-war adjustment in the U.S. … all argue for shock treatment“. In the letter Friedman recommended to deliver the shock approach with “… a package to eliminate the surprise and to relieve acute distress” and “… for definiteness let me sketch the contents of a package proposal … to be taken as illustrative” although his knowledge of Chile was “too limited to enable [him] to be precise or comprehensive”. He listed a “sample proposal” of 8 monetary and fiscal measures including “the removal of as many as obstacles as possible that now hinder the private market. For example, suspend … the present law against discharging employees”. He closed, stating “Such a shock program could end inflation in months”. His letter suggested that cutting spending to reduce the fiscal deficit would result in less transitional unemployment than raising taxes.

Sergio de Castro, a Chilean Chicago School graduate, became the nation’s Minister of Finance in 1975. During his six-year tenure, foreign investment increased, restrictions were placed on striking and labor unions, and GDP rose yearly.[97] A foreign exchange program was created between the Catholic University of Chile and the University of Chicago. Many other Chicago School alumni were appointed government posts during and after the Pinochet years; others taught its economic doctrine at Chilean universities. They became known as the Chicago Boys.[98]

Friedman did not criticize Pinochet’s dictatorship at the time, nor the assassinations, illegal imprisonments, torture, or other atrocities that were well known by then.[99] In 1976 Friedman defended his unofficial adviser position with: “I do not consider it as evil for an economist to render technical economic advice to the Chilean Government, any more than I would regard it as evil for a physician to give technical medical advice to the Chilean Government to help end a medical plague.”[100]

Friedman defended his activity in Chile on the grounds that, in his opinion, the adoption of free market policies not only improved the economic situation of Chile but also contributed to the amelioration of Pinochet’s rule and to the eventual transition to a democratic government during 1990. That idea is included in Capitalism and Freedom, in which he declared that economic freedom is not only desirable in itself but is also a necessary condition for political freedom. In his 1980 documentary Free to Choose, he said the following: “Chile is not a politically free system, and I do not condone the system. But the people there are freer than the people in Communist societies because government plays a smaller role. … The conditions of the people in the past few years has been getting better and not worse. They would be still better to get rid of the junta and to be able to have a free democratic system.”[101][102] In 1984, Friedman stated that he has “never refrained from criticizing the political system in Chile.”[95] In 1991 he said: “I have nothing good to say about the political regime that Pinochet imposed. It was a terrible political regime. The real miracle of Chile is not how well it has done economically; the real miracle of Chile is that a military junta was willing to go against its principles and support a free market regime designed by principled believers in a free market. […] In Chile, the drive for political freedom, that was generated by economic freedom and the resulting economic success, ultimately resulted in a referendum that introduced political democracy. Now, at long last, Chile has all three things: political freedom, human freedom and economic freedom. Chile will continue to be an interesting experiment to watch to see whether it can keep all three or whether, now that it has political freedom,that political freedom will tend to be used to destroy or reduce economic freedom.”[103] He stressed that the lectures he gave in Chile were the same lectures he later gave in China and other socialist states.[104]

During the 2000 PBS documentary The Commanding Heights (based on the book), Friedman continued to argue that “free markets would undermine [Pinochet’s] political centralization and political control.”,[105][106] and that criticism over his role in Chile missed his main contention that freer markets resulted in freer people, and that Chile’s unfree economy had caused the military government. Friedman advocated for free markets which undermined “political centralization and political control”.[107]

Iceland

Friedman visited Iceland during the autumn of 1984, met with important Icelanders and gave a lecture at the University of Iceland on the “tyranny of the status quo.” He participated in a lively television debate on August 31, 1984 with socialist intellectuals, including Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson, who later became the president of Iceland.[108] When they complained that a fee was charged for attending his lecture at the University and that, hitherto, lectures by visiting scholars had been free-of-charge, Friedman replied that previous lectures had not been free-of-charge in a meaningful sense: lectures always have related costs. What mattered was whether attendees or non-attendees covered those costs. Friedman thought that it was fairer that only those who attended paid. In this discussion Friedman also stated that he did not receive any money for delivering that lecture.

Estonia

Although Friedman never visited Estonia, his book Free to Choose exercised a great influence on that nation’s then 32-year-old prime minister, Mart Laar, who has claimed that it was the only book on economics he had read before taking office. Laar’s reforms are often credited with responsibility for transforming Estonia from an impoverished Soviet Republic to the “Baltic Tiger.” A prime element of Laar’s program was introduction of the flat tax. Laar won the 2006 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty, awarded by the Cato Institute.[109]

United Kingdom

After 1950 Friedman was frequently invited to lecture in Britain, and by the 1970s his ideas had gained widespread attention in conservative circles. For example, he was a regular speaker at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), a libertarian think tank. Conservative politician Margaret Thatcher closely followed IEA programs and ideas, and met Friedman there in 1978. He also strongly influenced Keith Joseph, who became Thatcher’s senior advisor on economic affairs, as well as Alan Walters and Patrick Minford, two other key advisers. Major newspapers, including the Daily Telegraph, The Times, and The Financial Times all promulgated Friedman’s monetarist ideas to British decision-makers. Friedman’s ideas strongly influenced Thatcher and her allies when she became Prime Minister in 1979.[110][111]

Criticism

Econometrician David Hendry criticized part of Friedman’s and Anna Schwartz’s 1982 Monetary Trends.[112] When asked about it during an interview with Icelandic TV in 1984,[113] Friedman said that the criticism referred to a different problem from that which he and Schwartz had tackled, and hence was irrelevant,[114] and pointed out the lack of consequential peer review amongst econometricians on Hendry’s work.[115] In 2006, Hendry said that Friedman was guilty of “serious errors” of misunderstanding that meant “the t-ratios he reported for UK money demand were overstated by nearly 100 per cent”, and said that, in a paper published in 1991 with Neil Ericsson,[116] he had refuted “almost every empirical claim […] made about UK money demand” by Friedman and Schwartz.[117] A 2004 paper updated and confirmed the validity of the Hendry–Ericsson findings through 2000.[118]

Although Keynesian Nobel laureate Paul Krugman praised Friedman as a “great economist and a great man” after Friedman’s death in 2006, and acknowledged his many, widely accepted contributions to empirical economics, Krugman had been, and remains, a prominent critic of Friedman. Krugman has written that “he slipped all too easily into claiming both that markets always work and that only markets work. It’s extremely hard to find cases in which Friedman acknowledged the possibility that markets could go wrong, or that government intervention could serve a useful purpose.”[119]

In her book The Shock Doctrine, author and social activist Naomi Klein criticized Friedman’s economic liberalism, identifying it with the principles that guided the economic restructuring that followed the military coups in countries such as Chile and Indonesia. Based on their assessments of the extent to which what she describes as neoliberal policies contributed to income disparities and inequality, both Klein and Noam Chomsky have suggested that the primary role of what they describe as neoliberalism was as an ideological cover for capital accumulation by multinational corporations.[120]

Visit to Chile

Because of his involvement with the Pinochet government, there were international protests when Friedman was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1976.[121] Friedman was accused of supporting the military dictatorship in Chile because of the relation of economists of the University of Chicago to Pinochet, and a controversial six-day trip[122] he took to Chile during March 1975 (less than two years after the coup that deposed President Salvador Allende). Friedman answered that he never was an adviser to the dictatorship, but only gave some lectures and seminars on inflation, and met with officials, including Augusto Pinochet, while in Chile.[123]

Chilean economist Orlando Letelier asserted that Pinochet’s dictatorship resorted to oppression because of popular opposition to Chicago School policies in Chile.[124] After a 1991 speech on drug legalisation, Friedman answered a question on his involvement with the Pinochet regime, saying that he was never an advisor to Pinochet (also mentioned in his 1984 Iceland interview[95]), but that a group of his students at the University of Chicago were involved in Chile’s economic reforms. Friedman credited these reforms with high levels of economic growth and with the establishment of democracy that has subsequently occurred in Chile.[125][126] In October 1988, after returning from a lecture tour of China during which he had met with Zhao Ziyang, Friedman wrote to The Stanford Daily asking if he should anticipate a similar “avalanche of protests for having been willing to give advice to so evil a government? And if not, why not?”[127]

Capitalism and Freedom

Capitalism and Freedom is a seminal work by Friedman. In the book, Friedman talks about the need to move to a classically liberal society, that free markets would help nations and individuals in the long-run and fix the efficiency problems currently faced by the United States and other major countries of the 1950s and 1960s. He goes through the chapters specifying a specific issue in each respective chapter from the role of government and money supply to social welfare programs to a special chapter on occupational licensure. Friedman concludes Capitalism and Freedom with his “classical liberal” stance, that government should stay out of matters that do not need and should only involve itself when absolutely necessary for the survival of its people and the country. He recounts how the best of a country’s abilities come from its free markets while its failures come from government intervention.[77]

Selected bibliography

  • A Theory of the Consumption Function (1957)
  • A Program for Monetary Stability (Fordham University Press, 1960) 110 pp. online version
  • Capitalism and Freedom (1962), highly influential series of essays that established Friedman’s position on major issues of public policy excerpts
  • A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960, with Anna J. Schwartz, 1963; part 3 reprinted as The Great Contraction
  • “The Role of Monetary Policy.” American Economic Review, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1968), pp. 1–17 JSTOR presidential address to American Economics Association
  • “Inflation and Unemployment: Nobel lecture”, 1977, Journal of Political Economy. Vol. 85, pp. 451–72. JSTOR
  • Free to Choose: A personal statement, with Rose Friedman, (1980), highly influential restatement of policy views
  • The Essence of Friedman, essays edited by Kurt R. Leube, (1987) (ISBN 0-8179-8662-6)
  • Two Lucky People: Memoirs (with Rose Friedman) ISBN 0-226-26414-9 (1998) excerpt and text search
  • Milton Friedman on Economics: Selected Papers by Milton Friedman, edited by Gary S. Becker (2008)
  • An Interview with Milton Friedman, John B. Taylor (2001). Macroeconomic Dynamics, 5, pp 101–31

See also

Notes

  1. Jump up^ Ebenstein, Lanny (2007). Milton Friedman: A Biography. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 89.
  2. Jump up^ Charles Moore (2013). Margaret Thatcher: The Authorized Biography, Volume One: Not For Turning. Penguin. pp. 576–77.
  3. Jump up^ Lanny Ebenstein (2007). Milton Friedman: A Biography. St. Martin’s Press. p. 208.
  4. ^ Jump up to:a b “Milton Friedman on nobelprize.org”. Nobel Prize. 1976. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  5. Jump up^ Thomas Sowell (2016-09-16). A Personal Odyssey. Free Press. p. 320. ISBN 0743215087.
  6. Jump up^ The Chicago School: How the University of Chicago Assembled the Thinkers Who Revolutionized Economics and Business
  7. Jump up^ “Milton Friedman”. Commanding Heights. PBS. October 1, 2000. Retrieved September 19, 2011.
  8. Jump up^ Milton Friedman—Economist as Public Intellectual
  9. Jump up^ Mark Skousen (2009-02-28). The Making of Modern Economics: The Lives and Ideas of the Great Thinkers. M.E. Sharpe. p. 407. ISBN 0-7656-2227-0.
  10. Jump up^ Among macroeconomists, the “natural” rate has been increasingly replaced by James Tobin‘s NAIRU, the non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment, which is seen as having fewer normative connotations.
  11. Jump up^ Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman stated that, “In 1968 in one of the decisive intellectual achievements of postwar economics, Friedman not only showed why the apparent tradeoff embodied in the idea of the Phillips curve was wrong; he also predicted the emergence of combined inflation and high unemployment … dubbed ‘stagflation.” Paul Krugman, Peddling Prosperity: Economic Sense and Nonsense in an Age of Diminished Expectations (1995) p. 43 online
  12. ^ Jump up to:a b Doherty, Brian (June 1, 1995). “Best of Both Worlds”. Reason Magazine. Retrieved October 24, 2009
  13. Jump up^ Edward Nelson, “Friedman’s Monetary Economics in Practice,” Finance and Economics Discussion Series, Divisions of Research & Statistics and Monetary Affairs, Federal Reserve Board, April 13, 2011. Nelson stated, “in important respects, the overall monetary and financial policy response to the crisis can be viewed as Friedman’s monetary economics in practice.” and “Friedman’s recommendations for responding to a financial crisis largely lined up with the principal financial and monetary policy measures taken since 2007.” Nelson, “Review,” in Journal of Economic Literature (Dec, 2012) 50#4 pp. 1106–09
  14. Jump up^ Lanny Ebenstein (2007). Milton Friedman: A Biography. St. Martin’s Press. p. 208.
  15. Jump up^ Charles Moore (2013). Margaret Thatcher: The Authorized Biography, Volume One: Not For Turning. Penguin. pp. 576–77.
  16. Jump up^ Milton Friedman (1912–2006)
  17. ^ Jump up to:a b Sullivan, Maureen (July 30, 2016). “Milton Friedman’s Name Disappears From Foundation, But His School-Choice Beliefs Live On”. Forbes. Retrieved 14 September 2016.
  18. Jump up^ “Capitalism and Friedman” (editorial), The Wall Street Journal November 17, 2006
  19. Jump up^ Václav Klaus (January 29, 2007). “Remarks at Milton Friedman Memorial Service”. Retrieved August 22, 2008.
  20. Jump up^ Johan Norberg, Defaming Milton Friedman: Naomi Klein’s disastrous yet popular polemic against the great free market economist, Reason Magazine, Washington, D.C., Oct. 2008
  21. Jump up^ Friedman 1999, p. 506
  22. Jump up^ Davis, William L, Bob Figgins, David Hedengren, and Daniel B. Klein. “Economic Professors’ Favorite Economic Thinkers, Journals, and Blogs”, Econ Journal Watch 8(2): 126–46, May 2011.
  23. Jump up^ “Milton Friedman, a giant among economists”. The Economist. November 23, 2006. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  24. Jump up^ “Who’s who in American Jewry”. 1980.
  25. Jump up^ Alan O. Ebenstein, Milton Friedman: a biography (2007) p. 10; Milton & Rose Friedman, Two Lucky People. Memoirs, Chicago 1998, p. 22.
  26. Jump up^ Eamonn Butler, Milton Friedman (2011) ch 1
  27. Jump up^ Alan O. Ebenstein, Milton Friedman: a biography (2007) pp. 5–12
  28. Jump up^ “Milton Friedman and his start in economics”. Young America’s Foundation. August 2006. Retrieved March 12, 2012.
  29. Jump up^ Ebenstein, Milton Friedman: a biography (2007) pp. 13–30
  30. Jump up^ Feeney, Mark (November 16, 2006). “Nobel laureate economist Milton Friedman dies at 94”. The Boston Globe. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  31. Jump up^ Friedman 1999, p. 59
  32. Jump up^ “Right from the Start? What Milton Friedman can teach progressives.” (PDF). J. Bradford DeLong. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  33. Jump up^ Bernanke 2004, p. 7
  34. Jump up^ Friedman 1999, p. 42
  35. Jump up^ Friedman 1999, pp. 84–85
  36. Jump up^ Milton Friedman; Rose D. Friedman (1999). Two Lucky People: Memoirs. University of Chicago Press. pp. 122–23. ISBN 9780226264158.
  37. Jump up^ Doherty, Brian (June 1995). “Best of Both Worlds”. Reason. Retrieved July 28, 2010.
  38. ^ Jump up to:a b “Milton Friedman Biography – Academy of Achievement”. Achievement.org. Retrieved 2014-04-22.
  39. Jump up^ Philip Mirowski (2002). Machine Dreams: Economics Becomes a Cyborg Science. Cambridge University Press. pp. 202–03. ISBN 9780521775267.
  40. Jump up^ CATO, “Letter from Washington,” National Review, September 19, 1980, Vol. 32 Issue 19, p. 1119
  41. Jump up^ Rose and Milton Friedman
  42. Jump up^ Inventory of the Paul A. Samuelson Papers, 1933–2010 and undated | Finding Aids | Rubenstein Library
  43. Jump up^ Ebenstein (2007). Milton Friedman: A Biography. p. 208.
  44. Jump up^ “Milton Friedman: An enduring legacy”. The Economist. November 17, 2006. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  45. Jump up^ Sullivan, Patricia (November 17, 2006). “Economist Touted Laissez-Faire Policy”. The Washington Post. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  46. Jump up^ Milton Friedman – Biography | Cato Institute
  47. Jump up^ Trustees
  48. Jump up^ Milton Friedman
  49. Jump up^ Lanny Ebenstein, Milton Friedman, Commentary, May 2007, p. 286.
  50. Jump up^ Asman, David (November 16, 2006). “‘Your World’ Interview With Economist Milton Friedman”. Fox News. Retrieved August 2, 2011.
  51. Jump up^ Christie, Jim (November 16, 2006). “Free market economist Milton Friedman dead at 94”. Reuters. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  52. Jump up^ Peter Robinson (2008-10-17). “What Would Milton Friedman Say?”. forbes.com. Retrieved 2014-12-13.
  53. Jump up^ Optimum Quantity of Money. Aldine Publishing Company. 1969. p. 4.
  54. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton. Inflation: Causes and Consequences. New York: Asia Publishing House.
  55. Jump up^ “Milton Friedman: END THE FED”. Themoneymasters.com. Retrieved 2014-04-22.
  56. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton (1969). Memoirs of an Unregulated Economist. Aldine Publishing Company. p. 4.
  57. Jump up^ Galbács, Peter (2015). The Theory of New Classical Macroeconomics. A Positive Critique. Heidelberg/New York/Dordrecht/London: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-17578-2. ISBN 978-3-319-17578-2.
  58. Jump up^ Kevin Hoover; Warren Young (2011). Rational Expectations – Retrospect and Prospect (PDF). Durham: Center for the History of Political Economy at Duke University.
  59. Jump up^ “Charlie Rose Show”. December 26, 2005. Missing or empty |series= (help)
  60. Jump up^ David Teira, “Milton Friedman, the Statistical Methodologist,” History of Political Economy (2007) 39#3 pp. 511–27,
  61. Jump up^ The Life and Times of Milton Friedman – Remembering the 20th century’s most influential libertarian
  62. Jump up^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6fkdagNrjI “There in no institution in the US that has such a high public standing and such a poor record of performance” “It’s done more harm than good”
  63. Jump up^ “My first preference would be to abolish the Federal Reserve” on YouTube
  64. Jump up^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6fkdagNrjI “I have long been in favor of abolishing it.”
  65. Jump up^ Reichart Alexandre & Abdelkader Slifi (2016). ‘The Influence of Monetarism on Federal Reserve Policy during the 1980s.’ Cahiers d’économie Politique/Papers in Political Economy, (1), pp. 107–50. https://www.cairn.info/revue-cahiers-d-economie-politique-2016-1-page-107.htm
  66. Jump up^ [1]
  67. Jump up^ [2]
  68. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton (1955). Solo, Robert A., ed. “The Role of Government in Education,” as printed in the book Economics and the Public Interest (PDF). Rutgers University Press. pp. 123–144.
  69. Jump up^ Leonard Ross and Richard Zeckhauser (December 1970). “Review: Education Vouchers”. The Yale Law Journal. 80 (2): 451–61. doi:10.2307/795126. JSTOR 795126.
  70. Jump up^ Martin Carnoy (August 1998). “National Voucher Plans in Chile and Sweden: Did Privatization Reforms Make for Better Education?”. Comparative Education Review. 42 (3): 309–37. doi:10.1086/447510. JSTOR 1189163.
  71. Jump up^ Milton Friedman (1991). The War on Drugs. America’s Drug Forum.
  72. Jump up^ Rostker, Bernard (2006). I Want You!: The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force. Rand Corporation. p. 4. ISBN 978-0-8330-3895-1.
  73. ^ Jump up to:a b Friedman, Milton (November 15, 2002). Capitalism and Freedom. University Of Chicago Press. p. 36.
  74. ^ Jump up to:a b c Ebenstein, Lanny (2007). Milton Friedman: a biography. New York: St. Martin’s Press. pp. 231–32. ISBN 978-0-230-60409-4.
  75. Jump up^ Ebenstein, Lanny (2007). Milton Friedman: a biography. New York: St. Martin’s Press. p. 243. ISBN 978-0-230-60409-4.
  76. Jump up^ Friedman and Freedom. Queen’s Journal. Archived from the original on August 11, 2006. Retrieved February 20, 2008., Interview with Peter Jaworski. The Journal, Queen’s University, March 15, 2002 – Issue 37, Volume 129
  77. ^ Jump up to:a b Milton Friedman; Rose D. Friedman (1962). Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition. U. of Chicago Press. ISBN 9780226264189.
  78. ^ Jump up to:a b Frank, Robert H (2006-11-23). “The Other Milton Friedman: A Conservative With a Social Welfare Program”. New York Times. The New York Times.
  79. Jump up^ “An open letter”. Prohibition Costs. Retrieved November 9, 2012.
  80. Jump up^ “Milton Friedman”. Liberal Democratic Party (Australia). Retrieved February 19, 2013.
  81. ^ Jump up to:a b Alan O. Ebenstein, Milton Friedman: A Biography (2007) p. 228
  82. Jump up^ “Economic Freedom of the World project”. Fraser Institute. Retrieved 16 February 2016.
  83. Jump up^ “In the Supreme Court of the United States” (PDF). Harvard Law School. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  84. Jump up^ Lessig, Lawrence (November 19, 2006). “only if the word ‘no-brainer’ appears in it somewhere: RIP Milton Friedman (Lessig Blog)”. Lessig.org. Retrieved April 2, 2013.
  85. Jump up^ “A New British Bill of Rights: The Case For”. ISR Online Guide. Retrieved 16 February 2016.
  86. Jump up^ Lanny Ebenstein (2007). Milton Friedman: A Biography. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 260.
  87. Jump up^ Selection Committee Announced for the 2008 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty,” Cato Institute, September 5, 2007. Accessed 4 January 2014.
  88. Jump up^ Milton Friedman Prize page at Cato Institute website. Accessed 5 January 2014.
  89. Jump up^ Summers, Larry (November 19, 2006). “The Great Liberator”. The New York Times.
  90. Jump up^ Stephen Moore, What Would Milton Friedman Say?” Wall Street Journal, May 30, 2013 p. A13
  91. Jump up^ Ingdahl, Waldemar (March 22, 2007). “Real Virtuality”. The American. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  92. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton; Friedman, Rose (1990). Free to Choose: A Personal Statement. Harvest Books. p. 34. ISBN 0-15-633460-7.
  93. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton (October 6, 2006). “Dr. Milton Friedman”. Opinion Journal. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  94. Jump up^ Letter from Arnold Harberger to Stig Ramel as reprinted in the Wall Street Journal 12/10/1976, and in Two Lucky People: Memoirs By Milton Friedman, Rose D. Friedman. Appendix A, pp. 598–99. Accessible at books.google.com
  95. ^ Jump up to:a b c Milton Friedman (August 31, 1984). Iceland Television Debate (Flash Video) (Television production). Reykjavík: Icelandic State Television. Event occurs at 009:48:00. Retrieved June 27, 2010.
  96. ^ Jump up to:a b [http:// Two Lucky People: Memoirs By Milton Friedman, Rose D. Friedman. Appendix A, pp. 591–93. Letter from Friedman to Pinochet, April 21, 1975.]
  97. Jump up^ Mask II, William Ray (May 2013). The Great Chilean Recovery: Assigning Responsibility For The Chilean Miracle(s) (Thesis). California State University, Fresno.
  98. Jump up^ “Chile and the “Chicago Boys””. The Hoover Institution. Stanford University. Retrieved 20 June 2014.
  99. Jump up^ O’Shaughnessy, Hugh (December 11, 2006). “General Augusto Pinochet”. The Independent. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  100. Jump up^ Newsweek of June 14, 1976
  101. Jump up^ “Free to Choose Vol. 5”. Archived from the original on February 9, 2008. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  102. Jump up^ Frances Fox Piven vs. Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, debate, 1980, YouTube.
  103. Jump up^ The Smith Center: Milton Friedman’s lecture, “Economic Freedom, Human Freedom, Political Freedom”, by Milton Friedman, delivered November 1, 1991.
  104. Jump up^ Friedman 1999, pp. 600–01
  105. Jump up^ “Interview with Jeffery Sachs on the “Miracle of Chile””. PBS. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  106. Jump up^ “Commanding Heights: Milton Friedman”. PBS. Retrieved December 29, 2008.
  107. Jump up^ “Milton Friedman interview”. PBS. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  108. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton; Grímsson, Ólafur Ragnar. Milton Friedman on Icelandic State Television in 1984.
  109. Jump up^ “Mart Laar”. Cato Institute. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
  110. Jump up^ John F. Lyons (2013). America in the British Imagination: 1945 to the Present. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 102.
  111. Jump up^ Subroto Roy & John Clarke, eds., Margaret Thatcher’s Revolution: How it Happened and What it Meant (Continuum 2005)
  112. Jump up^ David F. Hendry; Neil R. Ericsson (October 1983). “Assertion without Empirical Basis: An Econometric Appraisal of ‘Monetary Trends in … the United Kingdom’ by Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz,” in Monetary Trends in the United Kingdom, Bank of England Panel of Academic Consultants, Panel Paper No. 22, pp. 45–101.See also Federal Reserve International Finance Discussion Paper No. 270 (December 1985), which is a revised and shortened version of Hendry–Ericsson 1983.
  113. Jump up^ “M.Friedman – Iceland TV (1984)”. YouTube. Retrieved 16 February 2016.
  114. Jump up^ van Steven Moore, CMA (1984-08-31). “Milton Friedman – Iceland 2 of 8”. YouTube. Retrieved 2014-04-22.
  115. Jump up^ J. Daniel Hammond (2005). Theory and Measurement: Causality Issues in Milton Friedman’s Monetary Economics. Cambridge U.P. pp. 193–99.
  116. Jump up^ David F. Hendry; Neil R. Ericsson (July 1989). “An Econometric Analysis of UK Money Demand in Monetary Trends in the United States and the United Kingdom by Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz” (PDF). International Finance Discussion Papers: 355. Federal Reserve. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
  117. Jump up^ Hendry, David F. (25 April 2013). “Friedman’s t-ratios were overstated by nearly 100%”. ft.com. Retrieved 1 May 2013.
  118. Jump up^ Escribano, Alvaro (2004). “Nonlinear error correction: The case of money demand in the United Kingdom (1878–2000)” (PDF). Macroeconomic Dynamics. 8 (1): 76–116. doi:10.1017/S1365100503030013.
    Escribano’s approach had already been recognized by Friedman, Schwartz, Hendry et al. (p. 14 of the pdf) as yielding significant improvements over previous money demand equations.
  119. Jump up^ The New York Review of Books, Who Was Milton Friedman?, February 15, 2007
  120. Jump up^ Noam Chomsky (1999). Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order. New York, NY: Seven Stories Press.
  121. Jump up^ Feldman, Burton (2000). “Chapter 9: The Economics Memorial Prize”. The Nobel Prize: A History of Genius, Controversy, and Prestige. New York: Arcade Publishing. p. 350. ISBN 1-55970-537-X.
  122. Jump up^ O’Shaughnessy, Hugh (11 December 2006). “General Augusto Pinochet”. The Independent.
  123. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton; Friedman, Rose D. “Two Lucky People: One Week in Stockholm”. Hoover Digest: Research and Opinion on Public Policy. 1998 (4).
  124. Jump up^ Orlando Letelier, “Economic Freedom’s Awful Toll”, The Nation, August 28, 1976.
  125. Jump up^ The Drug War as a Socialist Enterprise, Milton Friedman, From: Friedman & Szasz on Liberty and Drugs, edited and with a Preface by Arnold S. Trebach and Kevin B. Zeese. Washington, D.C.: The Drug Policy Foundation, 1992.
  126. Jump up^ YouTube clip: Milton Friedman – Pinochet and Chile
  127. Jump up^ Friedman, Milton; Friedman, Rose D. Two Lucky People: Memoirs. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 9780226264158. Retrieved 18 October 2016.

References

  • Bernanke, Ben (2004). Essays on the Great Depression. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-11820-5
  • Butler, Eamonn (2011). Milton Friedman. Harriman Economic Essentials.
  • Ebenstein, Alan O. (2007). Milton Friedman: a biography.
  • Friedman, Milton (1999). Two Lucky People: Memoirs. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-26415-7.
  • Wood, John Cunningham, and Ronald N. Wood, ed. (1990), Milton Friedman: Critical Assessments, v. 3. Scroll to chapter-preview links. Routledge.

Further reading

External links

Free to Choose (original series) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1Fj5tzuYBE

Videos

Robert Mundell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Robert Mundell
Rmundell.jpg
Born October 24, 1932 (age 84)
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Nationality Canadian
Institution Johns Hopkins University (1959–61, 1997–98, 2000–01)
University of Chicago (1965–72)
Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland (1965–75) [1]
University of Waterloo (1972–74)
McGill University (1989–1990)[2]
Columbia University (1974 – present)
Chinese University of Hong Kong (2009 – present)
Field Monetary economics
School or
tradition
Supply-side economics
Alma mater London School of Economics
UBC Vancouver School of Economics
University of Washington
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
University of Waterloo
Doctoral
advisor
Charles Kindleberger[3]
Doctoral
students
Jacob A. Frenkel
Rudi Dornbusch[4]
Carmen Reinhart[5]
Influences Ludwig Von Mises
Influenced Arthur Laffer
Jude Wanniski
Michael Mussa
Contributions Mundell–Fleming model
Optimum currency areas
Research on the gold standard
Awards Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics (1999)
Information at IDEAS / RePEc

Robert Alexander Mundell, CC (born October 24, 1932) is a Nobel Prize-winning Canadian economist. Currently, he is a professor of economics at Columbia University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

He received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 1999 for his pioneering work in monetary dynamics and optimum currency areas. Mundell is known as the “father”[6] of the Euro, as he laid the groundwork for its introduction through this work and helped to start the movement known as supply-side economics. Mundell is also known for the Mundell–Fleming model and Mundell–Tobin effect.

Background

Mundell was born in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. He earned his BA in Economics at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, and his MA at the University of Washington in Seattle. After studying at the University of British Columbia and at The London School of Economics in 1956,[7] he then attended the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he obtained his PhD in Economics in 1956. In 2006 Mundell earned an honorary Doctor of Laws degree from the University of Waterloo in Canada.[8] He was Professor of Economics and Editor of the Journal of Political Economy at the University of Chicago from 1965 to 1972, Chairman of the Department of Economics at the University of Waterloo 1972 to 1974 and since 1974 he was Professor of Economics at Columbia University.[9] He also held the post of Repap Professor of Economics at McGill University.[10][11]

Career

Since 1974 he has been a professor in the Economics department at Columbia University; since 2001 he has held Columbia’s highest academic rank – University Professor. After completing his post-doctoral fellowship at the University of Chicago in 1957, he began teaching economics at Stanford University, and then Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University during 1959–1961.[2] In 1961, he went on to staff the International Monetary Fund. Mundell returned to academics as professor of economics at the University of Chicago from 1966 to 1971, and then served as professor during summers at the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva until 1975. In 1989, he was appointed to the post of Repap Professor of Economics at McGill University.,[10][11] In the 1970s, he laid the groundwork for the introduction of the euro through his pioneering work in monetary dynamics and optimum currency forms for which he won the 1999 Nobel Prize in Economics. During this time he continued to serve as an economic adviser to the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, the European Commission, the Federal Reserve Board, the United States Department of Treasury and the governments of Canada and other countries. He is currently the Distinguished Professor-at-Large of The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Among his major contributions are:

Awards

Mundell was awarded the Guggenheim Fellowship in 1971 and the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 1999. In 2002 he was made a Companion of the Order of Canada.

In 1992, Mundell received the Docteur Honoris Causa from the University of Paris. Mundell’s honorary professorships and fellowships were from Brookings Institution, the University of Chicago, the University of Southern California, McGill University, the University of Pennsylvania, the Bologna Center and Renmin University of China. He became a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1998. In June 2005 he was awarded the Global Economics Prize World Economics Institute in Kiel, Germany and in September 2005 he was made a Cavaliere di Gran Croce del Reale Ordine del Merito sotto il Titolo di San Ludovico by Principe Don Carlo Ugo di Borbone Parma.

The Mundell International University of Entrepreneurship in the Zhongguancun district of Beijing, People’s Republic of China is named in his honor.

International monetary flows

Mundell is best known in politics for his support of tax cuts and supply-side economics; however, in economics it is for his work on currency areas[12] and international exchange rates[13] that he was awarded the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel by the Bank of Sweden (Sveriges Riksbank). Nevertheless, supply-side economics featured prominently in his Bank of Sweden prize speech.

In the 1960s, Canada, of which Mundell is a native, floated its exchange: this caused Mundell to begin investigating the results of floating exchange rates, a phenomenon not widely seen since the 1930s “Stockholm School” successfully lobbied Sweden to leave the gold standard.

In 1962, along with Marcus Fleming, he co-authored the Mundell–Fleming model of exchange rates, and noted that it was impossible to have domestic autonomy, fixed exchange rates, and free capital flows: no more than two of those objectives could be met. The model is, in effect, an extension of the IS/LM model applied to currency rates.

According to Mundell’s analysis:

  • Discipline under the Bretton Woods system was more due to the US Federal Reserve than to the discipline of gold.
  • Demand side fiscal policy would be ineffective in restraining central banks under a floating exchange rate system.
  • Single currency zones relied, therefore, on similar levels of price stability, where a single monetary policy would suffice for all.

His analysis led to his conclusion that it was a disagreement between Europe and the United States over the rate of inflation, partially to finance the Vietnam War, and that Bretton Woods disintegrated because of the undervaluing of gold and the consequent monetary discipline breakdown. There is a famous point/counterpoint over this issue between Mundell and Milton Friedman.[14]

This work later led to the creation of the euro and his prediction that leaving the Bretton Woods system would lead to “stagflation” so long as highly progressive income tax rates applied. In 1974, he advocated a drastic tax reduction and a flattening of income tax rates.

Mundell, though lionized by some conservatives, has many of his harshest critics from the right: he denies the need for a fixed gold based currency or currency board[citation needed] (he still often recommends this as a policy in hyperinflationary environments) and he is both a fiscal and balance of payments deficit hawk. He is well known for stating that in a floating exchange rate system, expansion of the money supply can come about only by a positive balance of payments.

In 2000, he predicted that before 2010, the euro zone would expand to cover 50 countries, while the dollar would spread throughout Latin America, and much of Asia would look towards the yen.[15] Such predictions have proved highly inaccurate.

Nobel Prize winner

Mundell won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science in 1999 and gave as his prize lecture a speech titled “A Reconsideration of the Twentieth Century”. According to the Nobel Prize Committee, he got the honor for “his analysis of monetary and fiscal policy under different exchange rate regimes and his analysis of optimum currency areas”.

Mundell concluded in that lecture that “the international monetary system depends only on the power configuration of the countries that make it up”. He divided the entire twentieth century into three parts by different periods of time:

  • The first third of the century, from its beginning to the Great Depression of the 1930s, economics was dominated by the confrontation of the Federal Reserve System with the gold standard.
  • The second third of the century was from World War II to 1973, when the international monetary system was dominated by fixing the price of gold with the US dollar.
  • The last third of the century started with the destruction of the old monetary system due to the problem of inflation.

With the destruction of the old monetary system, a new international monetary system was finally founded. Controlling inflation by each country became a main topic during this era.

Television appearances

Mundell has appeared on CBS‘s Late Show with David Letterman. His first appearance was on October 17, 2002[16] where he gave The Top 10 List on “Ways My Life has Changed Since Winning the Nobel Prize.” In March 2004[17] he told “You might be a redneck” jokes followed in May 2004[18] with “Yo Mama” jokes. In September 2004[19] he appeared again, this time to read excerpts from Paris Hilton‘s memoir at random moments throughout the show. In November 2005[20] he told a series of Rodney Dangerfield‘s jokes. On February 7, 2006[21] he read Grammy Award nominated song lyrics, the night before CBS aired the 48th Grammy Awards.

Mundell also appeared on Bloomberg Television many times.

Mundell has also appeared on China Central Television‘s popular Lecture Room series. Professor Mundell was also a special guest making the ceremonial first move in Game Five of the 2010 World Chess Championship between Viswanathan Anand and Veselin Topalov.

Mundell started the Pearl Spring Chess Tournament, a double round robin tournament with six players. The first tournament in 2008 was won by the Bulgarian, Veselin Topalov. The next two: 2009–2010 was won by the Norwegian, Magnus Carlsen.

See also

References

  1. Jump up^ http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1999/mundell-bio.html
  2. ^ Jump up to:a b Nobel Prize Winners from Johns Hopkins University
  3. Jump up^ Essays in the theory of international capital movementspage 3. Retrieved September 12, 2016.
  4. Jump up^ RUDI DORNBUSCH by Stanley Fischer – Project Syndicate
  5. Jump up^ Warsh, David (November 1, 2009). “What The Woman Lived”. Economic Principals. Retrieved October 17, 2016.
  6. Jump up^ “Mr. Mundell, known as the father of the euro”[dead link]
  7. Jump up^ “Robert Mundell – Nobel Prize Winners – Key facts – About LSE – Home”. .lse.ac.uk. March 13, 2009. Retrieved January 1, 2012.
  8. Jump up^ [1]
  9. Jump up^ http://www.polyu.edu.hk/iao/nobel2009/mundell_bio.pdf
  10. ^ Jump up to:a b “Robert A. Mundell – Biography”. Nobelprize.org. Retrieved January 1, 2012.
  11. ^ Jump up to:a b “Biography | The Works of Robert Mundell”. Robertmundell.net. Retrieved January 1, 2012.
  12. Jump up^ A Theory of Optimum Currency Areas; The American Economic Review, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 657–665, 1961
  13. Jump up^ Capital Mobility, and Stabilization Policy under Fixed and Flexible Exchange Rates; Revue Canadienne d’Economique et de Science Politique, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 475–485, 1963
  14. Jump up^ “Mundell-Friedman debate” (PDF). Retrieved January 1, 2012.
  15. Jump up^ Mark Milner and Charlotte Denny (January 14, 2000). “The new endangered species | Business”. London: The Guardian. Retrieved January 1, 2012.
  16. Jump up^ show #1891 Archived August 15, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
  17. Jump up^ show #2144 Archived October 17, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
  18. Jump up^ show #2162 Archived May 16, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
  19. Jump up^ show # 2238 Archived February 23, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
  20. Jump up^ show #2466 Archived December 15, 2005, at the Wayback Machine.
  21. Jump up^ show #2505 Archived May 16, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.

External links

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Professor Paul Bloom — Introduction to Psychology — Yale University — Video

Posted on November 6, 2016. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, College, Communications, Education, High School, Life, Links, media, Non-Fiction, People, Raves, Resources, Tutorials, Video, Wealth, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

Paul Bloom: The Psychology of Everything

 

Yale University has an introduction to psychology course PSYC 110 as part of its Open Yale course program given in 2008  that can be viewed on youtube:

Introduction

2. Foundations: This Is Your Brain

3. Foundations: Freud

4. Foundations: Skinner

5. What Is It Like to Be a Baby: The Development of Thought

6. How Do We Communicate?: Language in the Brain, Mouth

7. Conscious of the Present; Conscious of the Past: Language

8. Conscious of the Present; Conscious of the Past:

9. Evolution, Emotion, and Reason: Love (Guest Lecture by

10. Evolution, Emotion, and Reason: Evolution and Rationality

11. Evolution, Emotion, and Reason: Emotions, Part I

12. Evolution, Emotion, and Reason: Emotions, Part II

13. Why Are People Different?: Differences

14. What Motivates Us: Sex

15. A Person in the World of People: Morality

16. A Person in the World of People: Self and Other, Part I

17. A Person in the World of People: Self and Other, Part II

18. What Happens When Things Go Wrong: Mental Illness, Part I

19. What Happens When Things Go Wrong: Mental Illness, Part II

20. The Good Life: Happiness

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

MLA Style Tutorials — Videos

Posted on November 15, 2013. Filed under: Blogroll, Book, Books, College, Communications, Computers, Constitution, Diasters, Education, Employment, government spending, High School, Language, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Talk Radio, Tutorials, Video, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , |

MLAPoster09

MLA_Cheat_Sheet

mla_example-1mla-sample-research-paper

Color_Guide

mla_article

Purdue OWL: MLA Formatting – The Basics

Purdue OWL: MLA Formatting: List of Works Cited

Using Purdue OWL as MLA and Bibliography resource

MLA in Three Minutes

MLA Tutorial #1: Basic Paper Formatting

MLA Tutorial #2: Basic Citation Format

MLA Tutorial #3: Works Cited Page Formatting

MLA Tutorial #4: Web Citations

MLA Tutorial #5: Citing Research

MLA Tutorial #6: In-Text Citations

MLA Tutorial #7: Punctuating In-Text Citations

Citing with MLA

Quoting vs. Paraphrasing – MLA Style

MLA Style Essay Format – Word Tutorial

MLA Citation Format, Part 1–Put Your Papers & Essays in Perfect MLA Style

Writing a Research Paper and Using In-text Citations

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live — Videos

Posted on July 17, 2013. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Crime, Education, Homicide, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Photos, Pistols, Politics, Press, Radio, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Rifles, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Technology, Tutorials, Video, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , |

MassadSurvey

shoot_to_live_massad

massad_Ayoob

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live – 1/8

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live – 2/8

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live – 3/8

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live – 4/8

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live – 5/8

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live – 6/8

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live – 7/8

Massad Ayoob – Shoot To Live – 8/8

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Robust Self Defense: Stand Your Ground — No Duty To Retreat From Criminal Attackers —  National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and Attorney General Holders Favor The Criminal Against The Law-Biding Victim Which The Gun Grabbers Like Obama and Holder  Want To Also Disarm — Videos

The Great Divider Obama, “White African-American”, Incites Eric Holder and Department of Justice (DOJ) Community Relations Service (CRS) Racist Attack Against George Zimmerman To Rally Black Voters In 2012 Presidential Campaign — Holder Should Be Impeached — Racist Racketeering And Outside Agitators and Media Show Trial and Electronic Lynching — Videos

George Zimmerman Trial Defense Closing Argument — Not Guilty of All Charges Including Murder and Manslaughter — Police Chief Was Right No Probable Cause To Arrest George Zimmerman For Anything — Malicious Political Prosecution and Media Political Show Trial and Electronic Lynching Fails Big Time — Killing Justified Self-defense! –Videos

How Much Did The Piers Morgan Show Pay Rachel Jeantel For Exclusive Interview? $100,000 — New Theory — Trayvon Martin Thought George Zimmerman Gay Rapist Cop or Security Guard — Creepy Ass Cracka? — Videos

Race Racketeers Running Race Rallies — Black Gangs Kill Blacks By The Thousands and Planned Parenthood Kills Black Babies By The Millions — Race Never Played A Role in Zimmerman Verdict Says Juror #b37!– Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Big Brother Bill Gates Funds k-12 Tracking of Students With InBloom Database — Invasion of Privacy — Opt Out — Videos

Posted on March 26, 2013. Filed under: American History, Babies, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Fiscal Policy, High School, history, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Technology, Tutorials, Video, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |

SOFTWARE- GATES

gateswide

Keynote: Bill Gates – SXSWedu 2013

The Bottom Line :Education Database

Defining the Need — inBloom

inBloom Vision

How inBloom’s shared data services work for educators and learners

inBloom Tagger Demo

inBloom Dashboard Demo

inBloom

inBloom launches with Gates/Carnegie funds to unify e-learning services

Summary: Despite the recent explosion in ed tech applications and services, adoption and use of data remains a significant challenge. InBloom’s new platform just may change that.

By Christopher Dawson for ZDNet Education

As recently as a couple years ago, the biggest problem schools faced with implementing technology tools for students and teachers was the lack of research-based, pedagogically sound, applications. There was plenty of software, some of it good, not much of it great, and very little of it really cranking out usable data for teachers and other stakeholders. The recent explosion of investment in ed tech has yielded some really valuable applications, though, and the challenges have shifted to adoption and ease of use of disparate software and services.

inBloom, which launched this week, is hoping to change that. I had the chance to talk with Iwan Streichenberger, CEO of inBloom, Inc., and couldn’t help but be impressed with both the current platform and the future vision of the non-profit. inBloom offers a set of technologies and services, most notably robust APIs, that allow single sign-on and aggregation of data from many web-based educational tools and provide a basis for companies to develop new solutions for schools, teachers, parents, and students that are interoperable without needing to conform to arbitrary standards or conventions. As the company put it in their press release,

The inBloom data integration and content search services enrich learning applications by connecting them to systems and information that currently live in a variety of different places and formats, while helping to reduce costs for states and districts. This comprehensive view into each student’s history can help those involved in education…act quickly to help each student succeed. It also helps educators locate standards-aligned instructional resources from multiple providers and match them with their students’ needs…

Additionally, the inBloom framework enables technology providers to develop and deploy products without having to build custom connections to each state and district data source. This means more developers will have the opportunity to create new and powerful applications to benefit students, with lower implementation costs and faster time-to-market.

For example, an SIS provider could build a custom dashboard with student data from any application connected to inBloom. 22 such providers have already signed on to connect their applications to inBloom and 9 states are involved in piloting the service. The real goal, though, goes back to the ed tech holy grail of “an IEP for everyone” (my words – inBloom calls it “[integration of] student data and learning applications to support sustainable, cost-effective personalized learning”). If teachers can’t easily access data generated by learning applications and stored in SIS/LMS platforms and then quickly find and provide appropriate resources for students based on these data, then we aren’t leveraging the tools in which we’re investing. Kids are just taking tests on the web and playing computer games at that point and, with 30+ kids in a class, there’s no real hope of differentiated instruction.

Although the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation have funded a wide range of educational initiatives, this one (which received initial philanthropic funding from the two organizations) strikes me as one of the most potentially transformative. Nobody benefits if the current unprecedented levels of investor interest in ed tech becomes a bubble that funded lots of applications from which teachers and students derive limited benefit. But if inBloom can harness these applications to develop a meaningful, well-rounded ecosystem, then the potential for ed tech to achieve much of what it has promised in the last 20 years (with only moderate success) increases significantly. It doesn’t hurt that companies with great ideas and great products will be able to tap into a ready market, either, eager to adopt strong applications from a unified ecosystem.

There will be more announcements and demonstrations from inBloom at SxSWEdu at the beginning of March where we’ll be able to see the system in action.

http://www.zdnet.com/inbloom-launches-with-gatescarnegie-funds-to-unify-e-learning-services-7000010900/

Bill Gates’ $100 million database to track students

Corporations gaining access to grades, addresses, hobbies, attitudes

By Michael F. Haverluck

Over the past 18 months, a massive $100 million public-school database spearheaded by the $36.4 billion-strong Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been in the making that freely shares student information with private companies.

The system has been in operation for several months and already contains millions of K-12 students’ personal identification ‒ ranging from name, address, Social Security number, attendance, test scores, homework completion, career goals, learning disabilities, and even hobbies and attitudes about school.

Claiming that the national database will enhance education, the main funder of the project, the Gates Foundation, entered the joint venture with the Carnegie Corporation of New York and school officials from a number of states. After Rupert Murdoch’s Amplify Education (a division of News Corp) spent more than a year developing the system’s infrastructure, the Gates Foundation delivered it to inBloom ‒ a nonprofit corporation recently established to run the database.

School officials and private companies doing business with districts might have plenty to be happy about with this information-sharing system, but ParentalRights.org President Michael P. Farris says parents have plenty to worry about when it comes to inBloom’s national database.

“The greatest immediate threat to children is the threat to their privacy,” Farris told WND in an exclusive interview. “The Supreme Court has recognized a sphere of privacy within the family, but this project would take personal information about each child, apart from any considerations of parental consent, and put it into a database being managed and monitored solely by the government agencies and private corporations that use it.”

And with globalists like Bill Gates (the world’s second richest man with a net worth of $61 billion) and big government joining hands in the project, could children’s information be abused for ulterior motives?

“I cannot speak to Mr. Gates’ personal motivations, [but] the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been connected with human rights organizations that promote the internationalist mindset, and this project clearly fits with that agenda,” Farris explained. “The Convention on the Rights of the Child committee has repeatedly browbeat nations to create a national database just like this that will allow the government to track children, purportedly to make sure their human rights are being protected ‒ different declared purpose, same kind of system, same invasion of privacy for government purposes.”

Michael Farris

When contacted for comment about the benefits and potential dangers of the database, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation did not respond.

Breach of privacy?

Holding the legal right to control student information, local education officials reportedly have the authority under federal law to share database files with private companies ‒ such as Gates’ Microsoft ‒ that sell educational products and services so that they can mine the info to create new tailored products.

But Farris believes the digital information distribution system violates the constitutional rights of parents to protect their children.

“We believe parents have the fundamental right to direct the upbringing, education and care of their children,” asserts Farris, who was named one of the “Top 100 Faces in Education of the 20th Century” by Education Week. “Historically, the Supreme Court has supported that right. That means parents are the primary guardians of a child’s privacy.”

He notes the hypocrisy of many globalist billionaires (such as Gates, whose 11-, 14- and 17-year-old children enjoy the extra security of private schools and for their own protection, have had to wait until the age of 13 to get a cell phone).

“This is just one more example of the elite internationalist double standard,” contends Farris, who also is the founder and chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA). “They are perfectly content to share your child’s personal information, while keeping their own children in private schools or under private tutors.”

Farris, who is also the founding president and current chancellor of Patrick Henry College, sees corporate leaders as using those of lesser means to benefit their own interests.

“They protect their own privacy at any cost, but you need to surrender yours for the good of their ideal society,” Farris adds. “Ultimately, it doesn’t seem so ideal for the rest of us.”

Farris insists that schools giving in to the corporate interests of billionaires, such as Gates and Murdoch, is a major breach of parental rights.

“Now the government is sharing private student information with other organizations without parental consent,” Farris points out. “We believe that infringes a child’s right to privacy, and it infringes the parents’ right to be the first line of defense for that child.”

Many parents concur and feel uneasy with school administrators having full control over their children’s files, especially with states and school districts having full discretion over whether student records are entered into the database.

“Once this information gets out there, it’s going to be abused,” parent Jason France told Reuters in Louisiana, which, along with New York, is slated to input virtually all student records statewide. “There’s no doubt in my mind.”

Illinois, Massachusetts, Colorado, Georgia, Delaware, Kentucky and North Carolina have pledged to contribute student records from various school districts.

Because federal officials claim that the national database does not violate privacy laws, the Department of Education maintains that no parental consent is needed by schools to share student records with any “school official” with a “legitimate educational interest” ‒ which includes school-contracted private companies.

Gates’ real take on security

Being in the business of contributing to educational technologies for decades, 57-year-old Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates has much vested interest in education, and in years past, he has had much to say about the privacy of electronic information.

“Trustworthy Computing is the highest priority for all the work we are doing,” Gates stated a decade ago in a famous company-wide memo at Microsoft. “We must lead the industry to a whole new level of Trustworthiness in computing.”

And by “trustworthy,” Gates was referring to not letting people’s information get into the wrong hands.

“Users should be in control of how their data is used,” explained Gates ‒ who believes that his customers’ information should not be freely distributed, but does not hold that view when it comes to parents and the records of their children.

“Policies for information use should be clear to the user. Users should be in control … it should be easy for users to specify appropriate use of their information …”

In fact, when it comes to protecting and courting customers, Gates has spared no cost.

“So now, when we face a choice between adding features and resolving security issues, we need to choose security,” states the memo from Gates, whose $150 million, 66,000-square-foot home on Lake Washington has a 2,500-square-foot gym, a 1,000 square-foot living room and a 60-foot swimming pool complete with an underwater music system. “Our products should emphasize security right out of the box, and we must constantly refine and improve that security as threats evolve.”

Bill Gates’ home on Lake Washington, near Seattle

Despite his endorsement of the school database, Gates ‒ who gave up first place in global net worth to Mexico’s Carlos Slim Helu ($69 billion) after giving away $28 billion through his foundation ‒ is a strong backer of International Data Privacy Day, which has this to say about protecting people’s information:

“In this networked world, in which we are thoroughly digitized, with our identities, locations, actions, purchases, associations, movements, and histories stored as so many bits and bytes, we have to ask – who is collecting all of this data – what are they doing with it – with whom are they sharing it? Most of all, individuals are asking ‘How can I protect my information from being misused?’ These are reasonable questions to ask – we should all want to know the answers.”

Officials of the annual event proclaim endorsement of the very principles that Gates’ new public school database evidently tramples.

“Data Privacy Day promotes awareness about the many ways personal information is collected, stored, used, and shared, and education about privacy practices that will enable individuals to protect their personal information,” the events’ organizers declare.

Student security not a priority

Even though the facilitator of the public school database promises that it will keep a tight rein on students’ information, a closer look into inBloom’s privacy policy shows another stance.

“[inBloom] cannot guarantee the security of the information stored … or that the information will not be intercepted when it is being transmitted,” the company’s documentation states.

Unlike most software and Internet users, parents have little recourse when it comes to protecting their children’s information on the database. Voicing their concerns with state officials via written protests, parents of public schoolers from Louisiana and New York are up-in-arms. Even the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) in Massachusetts, as well as attorneys in New York, are following suit.

But according to Farris, public education is just fanning the flames of parental fears that “Big Brother” is tightening its grip on the masses by treating the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) as a “living and breathing document” to undermine its original intent.

“We know the Department of Education quietly modified their understanding of FERPA law in the last two years to allow for a system like this,” Farris argues. “Homeschool Legal Defense Association, of which I am chairman, filed a letter with the Department opposing their intended changes, but like all such letters in this particular instance, our input was ignored.”

And has Bill Gates’ personal information been as freely accessible as he would public schoolers’ to be? Not exactly.

Just earlier this month, the now part-timer from Microsoft (since 2008) has been made the latest victim of celebrity data exposure, with his Social Security number, birthdate, credit card number and full credit report being posted online. No comment has been made whether Gates believes the dissemination of his SSN is a breach of privacy, but his heavy involvement in the school database indicates that sharing such information of public school students isn’t a breach.

And just how important is privacy to Gates?

In 1994, when he married Melinda in a private ceremony on the Hawaiian island of Lanai, he bought out every unoccupied room of all nearby hotels and booked every helicopter in the surrounding area to ensure privacy from photographers.

Reports also indicate that First Lady Michelle Obama was also a recent victim of having her SSN and credit report posted online. She and a couple dozen celebrities were impersonated by hackers who entered some of their basic personal information into a website ‒ the same type of information (of students) school officials are entering into their system by the millions.

President Barack Obama recently expressed his concern over electronic information being exploited by others, and when it comes to info being dispersed about his wife, he is dispatching U.S. authorities to investigate.

“We should not be surprised that if we’ve got hackers that want to dig in and have a lot of resources, that they can access this information,” Obama told ABC News. “Again, not sure how accurate but … you’ve got websites out there that tell people’s credit card info. That’s how sophisticated they are.”

And to make it easy for companies to tap in, inBloom has made its service free, but is likely to begin charging for its use by 2015.

Opening the Gates agenda?

Much concern has been expressed over the years regarding the driving force behind Gates and his organizations, which have demonstrated unflagging support of many leftist causes.

Just last week, the richest man in America lamented that Obama’s powers are too restricted.

“Some days, I wish we had a system like the U.K. where, you know, the party in power could do a lot and you know, you’d see how it went and then fine, you could un-elect them,” Gates proclaimed at a Politico event when asked about Obama’s performance as president, according to the Daily Caller.

In a speech just over a week ago at the Global Grand Challenges Summit put on by the Royal Academy of Engineering, Gates said capitalism “means male baldness research gets more funding than malaria,” , according to Wired Magazine.

Since the inception of the Gates Foundation in 1994, the same year Gates spent $30.8 million at an auction for a collection of Leonardo da Vinci’s Codex Leicester writings, he has been a staunch supporter of population control through vaccines and other methods.

Last summer, Gates and his wife represented their foundation at a “family planning” summit in London hosted by the U.K. Department of International Development, which included Planned Parenthood and the United Nations Populations Fund, along with other prominent pro-abortion advocates.

And at the exclusive Technology, Entertainment and Design 2010 Conference in Long Beach, Calif., Gates presented this population-control formula: P (people) x S (services per persons) x E (average energy per service) x C (average CO2 emitted per unit of energy) = CO2 (total CO2 emitted by population per year).

In his speech titled “Innovating to Zero!” he talked about keeping the world population from peaking at an estimated 9.3 billion.

“First we got population,” Gates explained. “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

Even though Gates suggested at the invitation-only event that using vaccines is one means to reduce world population, his foundation focuses media attention on other goals, such as eradicating measles and polio.

But the foundation’s extreme measures taken to administer the shots to undeveloped nations are often underreported.

In 2011, few people knew about partners of the Gates foundation forcing 131 Malawian children against their religious convictions to receive measles vaccinations at gunpoint as part of achieving the goal of vaccinating every child on earth, as reported by Natural News.

Gates, an ex-Boy Scout, is also an advocate of homosexual behavior, stating at last week’s Politico event that the youth organization should “absolutely” lift its ban on “gay” members when asked his opinion.

Standing side-by-side with Planned Parenthood ‒ which has documented that promoting homosexuality is one of its tactics behind population control ‒ Gates’ Microsoft was a major contributors to last year’s successful election campaign that worked to legalize same-sex marriage in his native Washington state.

The future of Gates’ database?

The new school database is not moving forward without legal resistance.

“It’s a lot of smoke and mirrors,” contended Electronic Privacy Law Center Administrative Counsel Khaliah Barnes in a statement to the Daily News. “What happens if a company using the data is compromised? What happens if the company goes out of business? We don’t know the answers.”

The issue over the database is being brought to the forefront as a major civil rights issue.

“Turning massive amounts of personal data about public school students to a private corporation without any public input is profoundly disturbing and irresponsible,” New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna told the Daily News.

The NYCLU is castigating New York State officials for denying parents the choice to opt out of the controversial program and for failing to warn parents of its implementation.

To counter Gates’ school database project, ParentalRights.org urges Americans to sign a petition supporting the Parental Rights Amendment, which will codify the fundamental right of parents in the U.S. Constitution to direct the upbringing, education and care of their children.

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Stop Obama’s Common Core Curriculum Standards — Progressive Indoctrination, Standardization and Tracking of American Children Into Collectivists — Little Boxes — Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Perot Museum Of Nature & Science — Dallas, Texas — Videos

Posted on March 10, 2013. Filed under: Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Culture, Education, Entertainment, High School, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Science, Tutorials, Uncategorized, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: |

perot museum

03_Perot_Museum

Dallas-Perot-Museum-of-Nature-and-Scienceperot_museum

New-Museum-in-Dallas-Perot

Perot Museum of Nature & Science Sneak Preview

Reaction :30 – Perot Museum of Nature and Science

Perot Museum Fly-through

Embracing the Power of Technology

Talley Associates – Perot Museum of Nature and Science

Kilograph: Dallas Museum of Nature and Science Animation

New Dallas Nature And Science Museum Opens

Official Perot Museum of Nature and Science Construction Time-Lapse

Day at The Perot Museum in Dallas!

Perot Museum Of Nature & Science

The Perot Museum of Nature and Science

Touring Dallas’ newest attraction: the Perot Museum of Nature and Science

ZANEOLOGY TV: Perot Museum of Nature and Science v.1

See the Veins Under Your Skin at the Perot Museum of Nature and Science in Dallas

Slices of a deceased female body at the Perot Museum of Nature and Science

Savor Dallas coming to the new Perot Museum

George John Visits the Perot Museum of Nature and Science

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Charlotte Iserbyt–The Deliberate Dumbing Down of the World–Skull and Bones–Might is Right–The Quigley Formula–New World Order–Videos

Posted on August 1, 2012. Filed under: American History, Babies, Blogroll, Books, British History, Business, College, Comedy, Communications, Computers, Constitution, Corruption, Crime, Demographics, Documentary, Economics, Education, Employment, European History, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Genocide, government, government spending, Health Care, High School, history, Immigration, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Music, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tutorials, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Welfare, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

George Carlin ~ The American Dream

Time Out: Charlotte Iserbyt – The Reagan Years

Charlotte Iserbyt – Deliberate Dumbing Down of the World

Charlotte Iserbyt served as Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, during the first Reagan Administration, where she first blew the whistle on a major technology initiative which would control curriculum in America’s classrooms.

Charlotte Iserbyt: The Deliberate Dumbing Down of the World

Download Mrs. Iserbyt’s book, as well as other materials, on her websites:

http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com
http://www.americandeception.com

Charlotte Iserbyt: The Miseducation of America Part 1-Full

The Miseducation of America – Part 2 (by Charlotte Iserbyt)

Charlotte Iserbyt Speaking At The Zombie Country Conference

Charlotte Iserbyt – Skull and Bones, The Order at Yale Revealed (Full)

Time Out Charlotte Iserbyt Part 1

Time Out Charlotte Iserbyt Part 2

charlotteiserbyt

Mind Control in Public Schools with Charlotte Iserbyt

State Of Mind delves into the abyss to expose the true agendas at work. This film reveals the secret manipulations at work and provides shocking and suppressed historical and current examples. From the ancient roots of the control of human behavior to its maturity in the mind control experiments of intelligence agencies and other organs of manipulation, State Of Mind reveals a plan for the future that drives home the dreadful price of our ignorance.

Alex Jones Movie (2013) State Of Mind The Psychology Of Control Full Version HD

Alex Jones Movie (2013) State Of Mind The Psychology Of Control Full Version HD: BUY THE DVD OR BLU-RAY SUPPORT THE DOCUMENTARY MAKERS http://www.infowarsshop.com/State-Of-…

State Of Mind: The Psychology Of Control, from the creators of A Noble Lie: Oklahoma City 1995, reveals that much of what we believe to be truth is actually deliberate deception. The global elites are systematically implanting lies into our consciousness to erect a “tyranny over the minds of men.” This film exposes the mind control methods being used to turn our once vibrant society into a land of obedient sheeple.
Are we controlled?
To what extent and by whom?
What does it mean for humanity’s future?
From cradle to grave our parents, peers, institutions and society inform our values and behaviours but this process has been hijacked. State Of Mind examines the science of control that has evolved over generations to keep us firmly in place so that dictators, power brokers and corporate puppeteers may profit from our ignorance and slavery. From the anvil of compulsory schooling to media and entertainment, we are kept in perpetual bondage to the ideas that shape our actions.

State Of Mind delves into the abyss to expose the true agendas at work. This film reveals the secret manipulations at work and provides shocking and suppressed historical and current examples. From the ancient roots of the control of human behaviour to its maturity in the mind control experiments of intelligence agencies and other organs of manipulation, State Of Mind reveals a plan for the future that drives home the dreadful price of our ignorance.

We are prepared for a new paradigm. Will we choose our own paths or have one selected for us? State Of Mind unveils the answers that may decide whether humankind will fulfil its destiny or be forever shackled to its own creation.

Inside the Academy: John Goodlad

John Goodlad is Professor Emeritus in the College of Education and co-founder of the Center for Educational Renewal at the University of Washington as well as President of the Institute for Educational Inquiry in Seattle. While he has previously held faculty positions at Emory University, the University of Chicago, and the University of California at Los Angeles, Goodlad first taught in a one-room, eight-grade school house in British Columbia, Canada. His experiences as a classroom teacher encouraged his later educational research examining grading procedures, curriculum inquiry, the functions of schooling, and teacher education. Recognized for his distinguished contributions to educational renewal, Goodlad drew national attention and spurred research efforts on school improvement through his award-winning book, A Place Called School (1984). Honored for his life-long commitment to universal education as a mainstay of democracy, Goodlad has received numerous awards and honorary degrees including the Harold W. McGraw, Jr. Prize in Education (1999), the first Brock International Prize in Education (2002), and the John Dewey Society Outstanding Achievement Award (2009). Having authored or edited more than three dozen books, 200 articles in scholarly publications, and 80 book chapters and encyclopedia entries, Goodlad’s more recent publications include: In Praise of Education (1997), Education for Everyone: Agenda for Education in a Democracy (2004), and Romances with Schools: A Life of Education (2009).

Dewey meets Goodlad

Goodlad’s goals of school

“Teaching as if Democracy Matters,” by John Goodlad

John Goodlad lecturing at UCLA 1/20/1968

Charlotte Iserbyt: Societies Secrets

“Her father and grandfather we members of the infamous Skull & Bones Society at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut.

“Charlotte Iserbyt is the consummate whistleblower! Iserbyt served as Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, during the first Reagan Administration, where she first blew the whistle on a major technology initiative which would control curriculum in America’s classrooms. Iserbyt is a former school board director in Camden, Maine and was co-founder and research analyst of Guardians of Education for Maine (GEM) from 1978 to 2000.

She has also served in the American Red Cross on Guam and Japan during the Korean War, and in the United States Foreign Service in Belgium and in the Republic of South Africa. Iserbyt is a speaker and writer, best known for her 1985 booklet Back to Basics Reform or OBE: Skinnerian International Curriculum and her 1989 pamphlet Soviets in the Classroom: America’s Latest Education Fad which covered the details of the U.S.-Soviet and Carnegie-Soviet Education Agreements which remain in effect to this day. She is a freelance writer and has had articles published in Human Events, The Washington Times, The Bangor Daily News, and included in the record of Congressional hearings.”

Antony Sutton – The Order of Skull and Bones [Brotherhood of Death]

Anthony C. Sutton

Antony Sutton-1976 Lecture (Full Length)

Norman Dodd On the hidden agenda for world government

Hidden Agenda Norman Dodd 1 of 6

G. Edward Griffins circa 1982 landmark interview of Norman Dodd, chief investigator for the Reece Committee, charged with the duty to ferret out the anti-American activities of non-profit, tax-exempt foundations.

Hidden Agenda Norman Dodd 2 of 6

Hidden Agenda Norman Dodd 3 of 6

Hidden Agenda Norman Dodd 4 of 6

Hidden Agenda Norman Dodd 5 of 6

Hidden Agenda Norman Dodd 6 of 6  

Rare Carroll Quigley interview – 1974 (Full Interview)

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 1/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 2/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 3/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 4/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 5/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 6/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 7/7

 

 

Professor Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton’s mentor at Georgetown University, authored a massive volume entitled “Tragedy and Hope” in which he states: “There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims, and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies, but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.”

“The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences…”

“The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds’ central banks which were themselves private corporations…”

“The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.” Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World in Our Time (Macmillan Company, 1966,) Professor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University

“The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England (RIIA) … [and] … believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.” Dr. Carroll Quigley

“As a teenager, I heard John Kennedy’s summons to citizenship. And then, as a student, I heard that call clarified by a professor I had named Carroll Quigley.”President Clinton, in his acceptance speech for the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, 16 July 1992

Read the full book “Tragedy and Hope” here:
http://www.archive.org/stream/TragedyAndHope/TH_djvu.txt

The Quigley Formula – G. Edward Griffin lecture

“Quigley” is the late Carroll Quigley, a Council on Foreign Relations member and historian, as well as mentor to CFR and Trilateral Commission member Bill Clinton. The lecture is based around the following quote from his book Tragedy & Hope, pp. 1247-1248:

“The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War)….The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. … Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”

NWO, Secret Societies & Biblical Prophecy Vol 1 (Revised)

Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt

“…Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt is an American freelance writer and whistleblower who served as a Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education during the first term of U.S. President Ronald Reagan, and staff employee of the US State Department (South Africa, Belgium, South Korea).[1][2][3] She was born in 1930[4] and attended Dana Hall preparatory school and Katharine Gibbs College in New York City, where she studied business.[5] Iserbyt’s father and grandfather were Yale University graduates and members of the Skull and Bones secret society.

She is known for writing the book The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America. The book claims that changes gradually brought into the American public education system attempt to eliminate the influences of a child’s parents (religion, morals, national patriotism), and mold the child into a member of the proletariat in preparation for a socialist-collectivist world of the future.[3] She alleges that these changes originated from plans formulated primarily by the Andrew Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Education and Rockefeller General Education Board, and details what she says are the psychological methods used to implement and effect the changes.[3]

In an interview[2] concerning secret societies and the elite agenda she disclosed that in the early 1980s she had a chance to meet with Norman Dodd who had been the chief investigator for the United States House Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations commonly known as the B. Carroll Reece Committee. In the video she claims that Dodd discussed a ‘network’ of individuals including Carnegie who planned to bring about world peace by means of rapid changes in society. These changes would be brought about by involving the populace in various wars and military conflicts. She further claimed that Dodd had discussions with Rowan Gaither, the president of the Ford Foundation in which he revealed that directives from the President of the United States compelled foundations related to the Ford Foundation to direct their funding into bringing about the merger of the USA with the Soviet Union.[6][7][8]

Filmed interviews of Iserbyt have her detail her story that lead her from school board trustee/administrator to becoming a Ronald Reagan administration staff in the U.S. Department of Education, and discovering further to her complete disbelief how these policies of a socialist-collectivist nature originated all the way to President Reagan, Vice President George H. W. Bush, and their policy advisers.

Up until 1960 Reagan, a leading member of United World Federalists (whose purpose was to merge America into a world government), was a charter member of Americans for Democratic Action. Reagan was also a member of the National Advisory Council of the American Veterans Committee[10] that was supposedly “under communist influence.”

Not listening to warnings provided to her in a book about Ronald Reagan (as California Governor, written by United Republicans of California (UROC)) given to her by friend, Iserbyt dismissed the seemingly outrageous claims made in the book a short time prior to her accepting and leaving for the government position. 1982 Reagan relieved her of her duties after leaking an important technology grant for computerized learning–Project BEST: “Better Education Skills through Technology”[11] brought about by the scholarly writings and a large study by an education specialist named Dr. John I. Goodlad at the Center for Educational Renewal at the University of Washington originally from British Columbia, Canada.[12] One book Iserbyt was critical of was “Schooling for a Global Age” edited by Charlotte C. Anderson, James M. Becker, Institute for Development of Educational Activities, New York 1979, that Iserbyt cited as having less to do with fostering learning and mainly to do with psychological manipulation of students possibly against the teaching of the child’s parents, for example, in arts classes.[13]

Parents and the general public must be reached also. Otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home. And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.

Dr. John I. Goodlad, Schooling for a Global Age-1979

And again later…

Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now… Parents and the general public must be reached also, otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home. And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.

Dr. John I. Goodlad, “Guide to Getting Out Your Message,” National Education Goals Panel Community Action Toolkit: A Do-It-Yourself Kit for Education Renewal (September 1994); 6.[14]

Through her father Charlotte Iserbyt was able to gain possession of the complete listings of the members, living and dead, of the Yale University Skull and Bones secret society, fashioned into a three-volume set: living members, deceased members, and complete listing of both[citation needed]. She cooperated in the writing of Dr. Antony C. Sutton’s book America’s Secret Establishment – The Order of Skull & Bones by providing the list of members obtained from her father.[15]

Fifteen Yale juniors are invited to join the Skulls each year in a process called “tapping”. A couple of thousand Yale graduates have been Skulls–WASP males from wealthy Northeastern families: Bush, Bundy, Cheney, Dodge, Ford, Goodyear, Harriman, Heinz, Kellogg, Phelps, Pillsbury, Rockefeller, Taft, Vanderbilt, Weyerhaeuser and Whitney were among its membership.

Iserbyt believes that the Bavarian Illuminati hid inside the Freemasons, and that the Skull and Bones Secret Society is derived from these Illuminati-degree Freemasons from Bavaria whose goals were documented in an original edition 1798 book Proofs of Conspiracy by John Robison in Iserbyt’s possession that she claimed was originally owned by the first president of the United States of America, Freemason, George Washington. The ideas of a ruling elite date back prior to Plato’s writings about the hierarchical plutocracy. Among the goals of the Order of the Illuminati were to destroy religions, and governments from within, merge the destroyed countries, and to bring about a one world government, a new world order, in their secret control.[16][17]

In the secret societies interview she states that virtually all of the Carnegie Foundation agreements with the Russian education system were still in place, as well as the U.S. Department of Education programs that Iserbyt claims brought about the downfall of American prosperity since the turn of the century, especially post World War II.[citation needed] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte_Thomson_Iserbyt

 

A Portrait of John Goodlad

Mark F. Goldberg

From his early days as a teacher in rural Canada to his eminent status today, John Goodlad has been crafting an agenda for constructive school renewal.

The acknowledged leader of educational renewal, John Goodlad has been at the vortex of every wind that has blown across education since World War II—holding firm to the basic ideas of humanism and progressivism. From the 1970s, when he took a stand against the behavioral objectives movement, to the early 1990s, when he opposed America 2000, Goodlad has steadfastly adhered to the wisdom of Alfred North Whitehead and John Dewey.

From Whitehead, he took the notions of “romance, rigor, application,” that is, embrace a compelling idea, examine and refine it with great rigor, and apply it to your work. From Dewey, he learned the concepts of progressive education, what might now be called constructivism, and the practice of applying theory with seriousness of purpose and intellectual power.

At 74, the slim, energetic Goodlad is professor of education at the University of Washington, Director of the Center for Educational Renewal, President of the Institute for Educational Inquiry, and former long-time dean of the Graduate School of Education at UCLA. The Nongraded Elementary School (1959) and A Place Called School (1984) are his most well-known books. As celebrated as he is today, however, Goodlad mused that to understand him, you must return to an era that is very different from today, to the Great Depression.

Growing Up in Rural Canada

Goodlad grew up during hard economic times in a rural Canadian town 2,500 feet up the side of a mountain overlooking Vancouver. His memories of childhood, nevertheless, are happy ones—of hiking in the mountains, fishing in the streams, picking fresh huckleberries, sleigh-riding in the snow, and, in his words, watching “the marvelous northwest summer come on so quickly and vigorously.”

As a boy, Goodlad did not spend much time thinking about higher education, for very few people went to the university in his day. “The university was something remote, and those who went weren’t fully trusted by the common man,” he said. His parents had only an elementary school education, but were certainly literate. His mother played the organ in church, and he remembers her walking to school to get his books when he was ill. Goodlad’s father wrote poetry and had a literary bent. Sadly, he contracted influenza during the great epidemic of 1918–1920 and died when young John was just 16.

Goodlad’s teenage years were a time when things flattened out economically. The vast majority of people had very little; in high school, he knew only one boy who owned a car. A good student, Goodlad had always envisioned teaching as “something I wouldn’t mind doing. It would be nice to say I was driven powerfully to education, but the truth of the matter was you didn’t have any choices.” Neither of his two older brothers went to college, and there was no way Goodlad could get to the university either.

At that time, however, Canada allowed students to matriculate for a fifth year of high school (senior matriculation) plus one year of normal school to qualify for a provisional teaching certificate in an elementary school. Goodlad completed these studies and attained a position in a one-room schoolhouse in a farming community not far from Vancouver. At that time, Goodlad told me, you were hired as a teacher if you were male and athletic, on the grounds that you could keep order in the classroom and live independently. It was a sexist world, he reflected.

Exploring the Boundaries of Teaching

Goodlad taught in a small room with 34 children scattered across eight grades, planning and teaching an average of 56 lessons every day. With very few books or instructional supplies, he felt fortunate to have three walls of chalkboard space. “At the end of each day,” he said, “I filled these spaces with instructions to pupils in eight grades and seven subjects.” The nongraded school concept had its genesis at this one-room school, where Goodlad also experienced the regulations of schooling that so often get in the way of teaching and learning.

Fate next took Goodlad to a graded elementary school where the routines of schooling continued to dominate daily practice. When crowded conditions forced him to relocate his classroom to a church, Goodlad was free to experiment with dismantling some of the encumbrances of traditional schooling. Unable to maintain the pace of managing 56 periods a day, Goodlad stumbled upon a way to integrate grades and subject matter when he had the custodian build a sand table for his class. “I created a very progressive environment,” he explained. “With a great big sand table…. I integrated history, geography, art, reading, and other subjects as well as broke down all of the grade lines.” Often in his career, Goodlad drew on this experience when he examined the nongraded elementary school and techniques for crossing subject lines.

Gathering Ideas, Shaping a Vision

Gradually, Goodlad began to further his education. During the summer he attained permanent certification at Vancouver’s Victoria College. He liked many of the classes he took, particularly radio script writing and others that had no direct connection to pedagogy. “I don’t think I was aware of the relationship between degree-getting and position-getting,” Goodlad told me, “but I became aware at some point that a degree was in the works.”

From 1943 to 1947, several important events occurred in Goodlad’s life. First, he became the director of education at the Provincial Industrial School for Boys, a place where youngsters, Goodlad recalled, “were incarcerated for everything from incorrigibility to murder.” Here, he learned the power of the environment to shape young people, a notion of culture that went against the conventional wisdom of the time and is still not fully accepted today.

Goodlad completed both his bachelor’s and master’s degrees at the University of British Columbia. Now married to Evalene Pearson, he began applying to graduate schools in the United States and Canada. Up until then, Goodlad had not spent a continuous period of residence in a university. Leaving behind everything he and Evalene had grown up with took a lot of courage, much of which Goodlad attributes to his wife. With her help and encouragement and with eight years of hard teaching experience behind him, Goodlad raced through the University of Chicago to a Ph.D. in three years.

Chicago operated not by course credits but, rather, by the examination process, so Goodlad—who was well versed in how to work by day and write and study late at night and on weekends— quickly passed his exams and wrote a dissertation on nonpromotion. His investigation found that the practice frequently had no helpful consequences for the student.

During this time, Goodlad also began a long relationship with Ralph Tyler—first a mentor and later a close friend. He learned to appreciate what he called Tyler’s “incredible ability not to tell you a darn thing, but to ask you a few questions and to help you reach a completely clear conclusion.” From Tyler, he also learned to respect extremely careful preparation and to expect high standards of intellectual competence from himself and valued colleagues in their work in education.

Viewing the School as a “Cultural Entity”

Up to this time, all of Goodlad’s teaching had been in Canadian schools. Deciding that he needed to know something about U.S. schools, he accepted a job with the Atlanta Area Teacher Education Service, an innovative attempt to work with hundreds of teachers who, like Goodlad, had gone to normal school, were teaching, but didn’t have degrees. A collaborative effort between the University of Georgia and Emory University, this service helped many teachers earn full degrees. Goodlad spent two years assisting teachers with college courses and, at age 29, was named the head of Emory University’s Division of Teacher Education.

During the mid- and late-50s, Goodlad continued his teaching and administration at Emory and then at the University of Chicago, finding time to start a family and to publish several books and articles. The Elementary School (1956) and The Nongraded Elementary School (1959)—two books that Goodlad co-authored—were among the most influential education books of this period.

In 1960, Goodlad began his quarter-century association with UCLA, where he served first as a professor and director of the lab school and, later, for 16 years as dean of the Graduate School of Education. Goodlad was seeking to have more association with schools, and the lab school was particularly appealing. It was a fairly representative school, not an elite school for the faculty and a few other families, as were many lab schools around the country. “The combination to head the lab school at UCLA and the professorship was very compelling,” Goodlad told me, for many reasons, not the least of which was the need to move to a better climate for the health of one of his children.

More and more, Goodlad began to focus his work and the work of the university on the school as a “cultural entity.” In the 1960s and ’70s, most of the work on schools was focused on the individual student or the individual teacher. It is a mistake, Goodlad fervently believes, to look at “the individual mosquito instead of looking at the mosquito pond.” The school is a serious and complex ecosystem, and, to bring about change, teachers need to understand how that entire system works, the complex weave of the entire fabric. As Goodlad expressed it:

We address teacher education reform, we address curricular reform, we address teaching reform, we address restructuring—but we rarely address the school as a total entity. We don’t prepare teachers for school, but for classrooms.

In the 1970s, Goodlad’s was often a lonely voice, crying out to see each school as a unit of change. Visitors, as many as 5,000 in a single year, came to the UCLA lab school, said that it was wonderful, and then lamented, “We have no way of doing that back home. There’s no climate for change there.” Goodlad’s habitual response was to advise them to involve their principal, superintendent, and community; to look carefully at their own culture; and then to build an agenda for change.

Goodlad consistently opposed what he calls “the behaviorist excesses” of the time, especially those that narrowed the teaching role into a stimulus-response model. Even the late Madeline Hunter, whom Goodlad had brought in to be principal of the lab school in 1962, joined the behaviorist camp, said Goodlad. Hunter did much to correct some of the misapplied progressive methods in the lab school, and late in her career went to great lengths to distance herself from strict behaviorism, as did other talented educators whom Goodlad had debated for more than a decade.

Inventing a Program for Change

I pressed John Goodlad to summarize what he has stood for over the years, to envision what he would do if he were given a school to renew. His first response was indirect: a rousing cheer for Ted Sizer’s commitment to the autonomy of the single school:

Sizer has been remarkably successful at managing to convince people that there is no one model. Every one of the schools in the Coalition is different but all share some fundamental principles.

After some prodding and my promise not to identify this as a definitive list, Goodlad agreed to talk about some important things he would do. “First, you have to train people in how to carry on a serious educational conversation.” For example, on a topic like grade retention, you gather all the relevant data on the issue and ask, “What’s a better way?” At the University of Washington, Goodlad and his colleagues work with associates to learn how to ground their conversation in defensible arguments, how to make decisions and formulate actions, and, finally, how to appraise the consequences of their actions.

A second feature of an effective change program, said Goodlad, is an agenda. Without one, reform breaks down. It’s fine to study the situation, to ask questions, to do a simple inventory of what is worthwhile and what is problematic about a school. But, warned Goodlad, “It is a terrible mistake to go to your community blank.” The agenda can include a list of principles about which you feel strongly, or it can be a simple inventory of the local situation, but reform will descend into rancorous fighting, he cautioned, if it is based on a group of people expressing their pet peeves.

All successful reform is based on a compelling agenda. The Coalition of Essential Schools, Howard Gardner’s work, and the Center for Education Renewal, for example, are testimony to this fact. People need to buy into the agenda, Goodlad advised. They can then elaborate the agenda and even make interesting and serious changes, but there must be some template at the outset of sufficient complexity and promise to engage people.

Finally, Goodlad talked about the necessity of long-term and abiding commitment on the part of the staff. Too many change programs last only as long as one or two key people are interested. Goodlad cited instances where superintendents told him of their commitment and soon after applied for other jobs. The superintendent, the principal, and teachers are the initial key players in this effort. Almost no school can or should get a new staff. “The idea is not to restructure schools but to renew them,” Goodlad urged, a process that takes many hours of serious conversation.

After engaging in a dialogue, the staff can sit down and examine the work of Madeline Hunter, Ted Sizer, James Comer, and others and then decide what each can contribute to the agenda. The university can provide assistance if requested, but the emphasis is always on renewal and not on what Goodlad called “parachuting stuff in” that the school doesn’t need.

Charting a Personal Agenda

At this stage of his life, John Goodlad has no intention of slowing down. “We are entering the 10th year of a 15-year agenda at the Center for Educational Renewal,” he explained. “We have developed a strategy for change that’s based on more than a quarter of a century of research and other experiences, and we have managed to get people to buy into that voluntarily: the National Network for Educational Renewal.” With 16 settings in 14 states, the network is committed to the intense training of educators in the techniques of renewal, respect for the uniqueness of each school, and the simultaneous renewal of schools and teacher education. The network is now undergoing dramatic growth involving 25 colleges and universities, nearly 100 school districts, and more than 250 partner schools.

Goodlad continues to emphasize the importance, in a democratic society, of making it comfortable for schools to go beyond the custodial functions, the regulations, and other barriers that so bedeviled him in his first year of teaching. In fact, his eight years in Canadian public schools led to his belief that college educators who have a practical background can be the link between research and practice that is essential to overcoming these classroom obstacles to innovation. Goodlad has developed these and other concepts in his most recent book, Educational Renewal: Better Teachers, Better Schools (1994).

While planning an agenda for himself well into the next century, Goodlad does understand the stage of life that he has reached. Now is the time to write even more, to make the agenda for renewal ever clearer and more accessible, he told me. Paraphrasing Dewey’s words of 70 years ago, Goodlad reflected, “What the researcher in education must do is to get immersed in the complex phenomena, then withdraw and think about the issues.” Goodlad is thinking about them and for the rest of his career will continue his life’s work in school renewal.

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar95/vol52/num06/A-Portrait-of-John-Goodlad.aspx

Archive

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Eugen Maria Schulak and Herbert Unterköfler: The Austrian School of Economics: A History of Its Ideas, Ambassadors, and Institutions–Videos

Posted on December 8, 2011. Filed under: American History, Banking, Books, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, European History, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Tutorials | Tags: , , , , , , , |

Eugen Maria Schulak and Herbert Unterköfler:

 ‘The Austrian School of Economics: A History of Its Ideas, Ambassadors, and Institutions’.

Download

http://mises.org/books/Austrian_school_schulak.pdf

Preface to the English Edition

Preface

The Austrian School in Brief

  1. Vienna in the Mid-Nineteenth Century
  2. Economics as an Academic Discipline
  3. The Discovery of the Self: The Theory of Subjective Value
  4. The Emergence of the Austrian School in the Methodenstreit
  5. Carl Menger: Founder of the Austrian School
  6. Time is Money: The Austrian theory of Capital and Interest
  7. Friedrich von Wieser: From Economist to Social Scientist
  8. Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk: Economist, Minister, Aristocrat
  9. Emil Sax: The Recluse from Voloska
  10. Further Students of Menger and Other Supporters
  11. Money Makes the World Go Round: The Monetary theory of the Business Cycle
  12. Joseph A. Schumpeter: Maverick and Enigma
  13. Schumpeter’s theory of Economic Development
  14. The Austrian School’s Critique of Marxism
  15. The Consequences of War: The Imminent Collapse
  16. Between the Wars: From Re-formation to Exodus
  17. Ludwig von Mises: The Logician of Freedom
  18. Friedrich August von Hayek: Grand Seigneur on the Fence
  19. Other Members of the Younger Austrian School
  20. Praxeology: A New Start from Ludwig von Mises
  21. Friedrich August von Hayek’s Model of Society and His Theory of Cultural Evolution
  22. The Entrepreneur
  23. The Rejected Legacy: Austria and the Austrian School After
  24. The Renaissance of the old ‘Viennese’ School: The New Austrian School of Economics

“…The Austrian School is in the news as never before. It is discussed on business pages, academic journals, and speeches by public figures. At long last, there is a brilliant and engaging guide to the history, ideas, and institutions of the Austrian School of economics. It is written by two Austrian intellectuals who have gone to the sources themselves to provide a completely new look at the tradition and what it means for the future. This is the first such authoritative book that has appeared on this topic.

The Austrian School of Economics: A History of Its Ideas, Ambassadors, and Institutions, by Eugen Maria Schulak and Herbert Unterköfler appeared first in German. It has been a sensation: the first and most authoritative source on this hot topic. This new English translation by Arlene Oost-Zinner, complete with a vast scholarly apparatus of citations and bibliographies, is academic at its core but also easy-to-read, entertaining, and fascinating on every page.

They set the stage with a discussion of the culture of 19th century Vienna, and the striking innovation that came with Carl Menger’s subjective theory of value. They discuss the titanic struggle over method that took place between the Viennese Mengerians and the German Historical School.

Next comes a thrilling account of the second generation of Austrians, their politics, their theories, their personal splits, their idiosyncrasies, their debates. The cast of characters here is far larger than most people in the English-speaking world have known. The authors operate as tour guides to this world that is mostly unknown to Americans due to the remoteness of time and the differences in language.

The stories they tell of Mises in Vienna, as well as Hayek and Schumpeter, include anecdotes never known before. It is particularly interesting for Americans to read because we have mostly had to understand the history of the Austrian School based on a far more limited set of literary resources.

What emerges from the account here is the singular contribution that Mises himself made in shaping the modern Austrian School into what it is today. Here we have the highest tribute to the power of ideas. Mises left his mark in a decisive way that is right now driving political and economic change the world over.

If you are like many people, you have been curious about the Austrian School but didn’t know where to turn to discover more about it. This book is the one that makes sense of it all! …”

http://mises.org/store/Austrian-School-of-Economics-A-History-of-Its-Ideas-Ambassadors-and-Institutions-P10453.aspx

The Austrian School of Economics | Jörg Guido Hülsmann

The Future of Austrian Economics | Murray N. Rothbard 

“This is the famous speech by Murray Rothbard given in the days following the collapse of the Soviet empire. His exuberance is palpable has he explains the meaning of it all for the place of liberty in the history of civilization. A brilliant scholar and passionate defender of Liberty, Professor Murray Rothbard (1926-1995) was dean of the Austrian School of economics, holder of the S.J. Hall Chair at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and Academic Vice President of the Ludwig von Mises Institute.
The author of 17 books and thousands of articles, the foremost Misesian economist, the father of modern freedom theory, and the most delightful personality in the profession, this great teacher here spellbinds an audience of students, faculty, and business leaders in the “Future of Austrian Economics,” at the 1990 Mises University at Stanford.
Only Austrian economics, Rothbard shows, can explain the collapse of socialism/communism and tell us what should replace it: laissez-faire capitalism. There is a lesson here as well, he shows, for dealing with the Leviathan in Washington, D.C.”

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 1-55–Download or Listen To Podcasts–Give It A Listen–Videos

Posted on November 23, 2011. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Art, Babies, Banking, Blogroll, Books, Business, Climate, College, Comedy, Communications, Computers, Crime, Cult, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Dirty Bomb, Drug Cartels, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Enivornment, Entertainment, European History, Farming, Federal Government, Films, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Games, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Homes, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, Movies, Natural Gas, Nuclear, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Philosophy, Pistols, Politics, Private Sector, Psychology, Public Sector, Rants, Raves, Resources, Rifles, Taxes, Tutorials, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , |

Give it a listen!

Pronk Pops Show 55:November 23, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 54:November 16, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 53:November 9, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 52:November 2, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 51:October 26, 2011

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22 (Part 2)-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22 (Part 1)

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Give it a listen!

itunes pic

Pronk Pops Show 55

November 23, 2011 05:01 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 55, November 23, 2011

Segment 0: Israeli Brainwashed Glenn Beck’s Confused Hit Piece On Ron Paul–Get A Clue–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/23/pronk-pops-show-55-november-23-2011-israeli-brainwashed-glenn-becks-confused-hit-piece-on-ron-paul-get-a-clue-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2429&preview_nonce=6fda29e7e2

Segment 1: Republican Presidential Debate On National Security–November 22, 2011–CNN, Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/23/pronk-pops-show-55-november-23-2011-ron-paul-highlights-republican-presidential-debate-on-national-security-november-22-2011-cnn-heritage-foundation-american-enterprise-institute-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2436&preview_nonce=d907d97b32

Segment 2: Collectivists vs. Individualists: Occupy Wall Street Compared To Tea Party–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/23/pronk-pops-show-55-november-23-2011-collectivists-vs-individualists-occupy-wall-street-compared-to-tea-party-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2444&preview_nonce=bacbfb2fb5

Segment 3: Who Is Behind And Funding Occupy Wall Street–The Radical Left: Communist Party USA, Socialist Party USA, Democratic Socialists of America, Maoist Revolutionary Communist Party, Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party, Worker’s World Party,Working Families Party (front for ACORN), New York Communities For Change, Adbusters, George Soros and Barack Obama–Video

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/23/pronk-pops-show-55-november-23-2011-segment-4-who-is-behind-and-funding-occupy-wall-street-the-radical-left-communist-party-usa-socialist-party-usa-democratic-socialists-of-america-mao/?preview=true&preview_id=2449&preview_nonce=89773712b1

Segment 4, Remembering John F. Kennedy–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/23/pronk-pops-show-55-november-23-2011-segment-4-remembering-john-f-kennedy-a-pathway-to-prosperity-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2460&preview_nonce=6f0b0269ce

Pronk Pops Show 54

November 16, 2011 03:43 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 54, November 16, 2011

Segment 0: Ron Paul On Bill Bennett’s Morning In America Show–6-8 A.M Eastern Time,Wednesday, November 16, 2011?–Talk Radio–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/pronk-pops-show-54-november-16-2011-segment-0-ron-paul-on-bill-bennetts-morning-in-america-show-6-8-a-m-eastern-timewednesday-november-16-2011-talk-radio-videos/

Segment 1: CBS–Communists, Bolshevik, Socialists–Progressives All–Limited Ron Paul To 90 Seconds And Pulls Poll In Republican Presidential Debate On Foreign Policy–Warfare and Welfare Washington vs. Peace and Prosperity People–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/pronk-pops-show-54-november-16-2011-segment-1-cbs-communists-bolshevik-socialists-progressives-all-limited-ron-paul-to-90-seconds-and-pulls-poll-in-republican-presidential-debate-on-foreign-p/

Segment 2, Super Committee/Congress Is Neither Super Nor Congressional–Cut $1,000 Billion In Fiscal Year 2013 Budget And Pass FairTax Or You Are Fired!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/pronk-pops-show-54-november-16-2011-segment-2-super-committeecongress-is-neither-super-nor-congressional-cut-1000-billion-in-fiscal-year-2013-budget-and-pass-fairtax-or-you-are-fired-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 53

November 11, 2011 04:54 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 53, November 9, 2011

Segment 0: Unemployment Rate 9.0 Percent Or Greater For 28 Months and Over 8% For Entire Obama Administration–Only 80,000 New Jobs Created in October, 2011–Never Created 250,000 Permanent Jobs In A Single Month Of Obama Presidency–Videos

For addition information and videos:
http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/pronk-pops-show-53-november-9-2011-segment-0/

Segment 1: 50 Year American Tax Revolution: When The Impossible Became The Inevitable–Flat Tax or FairTax–Videos

For addition information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/pronk-pops-show-53-november-9-2011-segment-1-the-50-year-american-tax-revolt/

Segment 2, Student Interview On Republican Presidential Candidates Debates and 2012 Election

For addition information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/pronk-pops-show-53-november-9-2011-segment-2-student-interview-on-republican-presidential-candidates-debates-and-2012-election/

Pronk Pops Show 52

November 02, 2011 04:40 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 52, November 2, 2011

Segment 0: 50 Year American Tax Revolution: When The Impossible Became The Inevitable–Flat Tax or FairTax–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/pronk-pops-show-52-november-2-2011-segment-0-50-year-american-tax-revolution-when-the-impossible-became-the-inevitable-flat-tax-or-fairtax-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2260&preview_nonce=6d5287a668

Segment 1: Newt Gingrich’s Optional 15% Flat Tax Plus 15.3% Social SecurityTax–More Taxes Than Cain’s-9-9-9 (27%) Tax Plan But Less Than Perry’s Optional 20% Flat Tax Plus 15.3% Social SecurityTax–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/pronk-pops-show-52-november-2-2011-segment-1-newt-gingrichs-optional-15-flat-tax-plus-15-3-social-securitytax-more-taxes-than-cains-9-9-9-27-tax-plan-but-less-than-perrys-optional-20-flat/

Segment: 2: Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 Plan: 9% Business Income Flat Tax, 9% Personal Income Flat Tax, 9% National Retail Consumption Tax–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/pronk-pops-show-52-segment-2-herman-cains-9-9-9-plan-9-business-income-flat-tax-9-personal-income-flat-tax-9-national-retail-consumption-tax-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 52, November 2, 2011: Segment 3: Perry proposes optional flat 20 percent income tax and cap on government spending–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/pronk-pops-show-52-november-2-2011-segment-3-perry-proposes-optional-flat-20-percent-income-tax-and-cap-on-government-spending-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 52, November 2, 2011: Segment 4: A Ron Paul tax reform plan: no income taxes or IRS — FairTax Less!–“When The Impossible Became The Inevitable”–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/11/02/pronk-pops-show-52-november-2-2011-segment-4-a-ron-paul-tax-reform-plan-no-income-taxes-or-irs-fairtax-less-when-the-impossible-became-the-inevitable-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2300&preview_nonce=7e24e7bf37

Pronk Pops Show 51

October 27, 2011 12:37 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 51, Octber 26, 2011

Segment 0: Perry proposes optional flat 20 percent income tax and cap on government spending–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/25/pronk-pops-show-51-october-26-2011-segment-0-perry-proposes-optional-flat-20-percent-income-tax-and-a-cap-on-government-spending-videos/

Segment 1: A Ron Paul tax reform plan: no income taxes or IRS — FairTax Less!

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/pronk-pops-show-51-october-26-2011-segment-1-a-ron-paul-tax-reform-plan-no-income-taxes-or-irs-fairtax-less/

Pronk Pops Show 50

October 20, 2011 10:06 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 50, October 19, 2011

Segment 0: Ron Paul’s Economic Plan for Restoring America to Peace and Prosperity–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/pronk-pops-show-50-october-19-2011-segment-0-ron-paul%E2%80%99s-economic-plan-for-restoring-america-to-peace-and-prosperity-videos/

Special Guest Interview: Stephen Levine: Chasing and Photographing Thunderstorms

Segment 1: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate in Las Vegas–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/pronk-pops-show-50-october-19-2011-segment-1-segment-1-republican-presidential-candidate-debate-in-las-vegas-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 49

October 12, 2011 04:22 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 49, October 12, 2011

Segment 0: Let a 1,000 Apples Bloom: Creating Unbelievable Products, Wealth and Jobs–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/11/pronk-pops-show-49-october-12-2011-segment-0-let-a-1000-apples-bloom-creating-unbelievable-products-wealth-and-jobs-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2155&preview_nonce=f67fe5a59f

Segment 1: President Obama Beats 62 Year Record Held By Reagan: Unemployment Rate Over 8% For 32 Months and Over 9% For 27 Months!–Average Weeks Unemployed Hits All Time High of 40.5 Weeks!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/pronk-pops-show-49-october-12-2011-segment-1-president-obama-beats-62-year-record-held-by-reagan-unemployment-rate-over-8-for-32-months-and-over-9-for-27-months-average-weeks-unemployed-hits-al/

Pronk Pops Show 48

October 06, 2011 08:47 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 48, October 8, 2011

Segment 0: President Obama In Dallas Tuesday Oct. 4: Collecting Contributions For $1,000,000,000 Propaganda Campaign And Demanding His Jobs Bill Be Passed–More Taxes, More Spending, More Deficits, More Debt, More Unemployment–No Hope, No Change, No Jobs, No Thanks–”How’s That Hopey-Changey Stuff Working Out For Ya?”–Videos

For addition information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/05/pronk-pops-show-48-october-5-2011-segment-0-president-obama-in-dallas-tuesday-oct-4-collecting-contributions-for-1000000000-propaganda-campaign-and-demanding-his-jobs-bill-be-passed%E2%80%93/

Segment 1: Gungate: What did you know and When Did You Know About Operation Fast and Furious And Project Gunrunner– Attorney General Holder and President Obama?

For addition information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/05/pronk-pops-show-48-october-5-2011-segment-1-obamas-gungate-what-did-you-know-and-when-did-you-know-about-operation-fast-and-furious-and-project-gunrunner%E2%80%93-attorney-general-holder-and-pr/

Pronk Pops Show 47

September 28, 2011 04:57 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 47, September 28, 2011

Segment 0: Ron Paul On U.S. Foreign Policy–Mutually Assured Destruction vs Mutually Assured Respect –Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/27/pronk-pops-show-47-segment-0-ron-paul-on-u-s-foreign-policy-mutually-assured-destruction-vs-mutually-assured-respect-videos/

Segment 1: Herman Cain Wins Florida Straw Poll: The Cain Mutiny–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/27/pronk-pops-show-47-segment-1-herman-cain-wins-florida-straw-poll-the-cain-mutiny-videos/

Segment 2: Republican Presidential Debate, September 22, 2011–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/27/pronk-pops-show-47-september-28-2011-segment-2-republican-presidential-debate-september-22-2011-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 46

September 21, 2011 04:29 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 46, September 21, 2011

Segment 0: Obama’s Solargate: Solyndra Stimulus Spending Cost Taxpayers An Estimated $535 Million–Crony Capitalism Campaign Contribution Corruption–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/pronk-pops-show-46-september-21-2011-segment-0-obamas-solargate-solyndra-stimulus-spending-cost-taxpayers-an-estimated-535-million-crony-capitalism-campaign-contribution-corruption-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2027&preview_nonce=62baed34f8

Segment 1: Eat The Rich!–Vote Obama In 2012 For More Spending, More Taxes, More Deficits, More Debt, More Unemployment, More Recession–No Hope–No Change–No Deal!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/pronk-pops-show-46-september-21-2011-segment-1-eat-the-rich-vote-obama-in-2012-for-more-spending-more-taxes-more-deficits-more-debt-more-unemployment-more-recession-no-hope-no-change-no/

Segment 2: Ron Paul On U.S. Foreign Policy–Mutually Assured Destruction vs Mutually Assured Respect –Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/pronk-pops-show-46-september-21-2011-segment-2-ron-paul-on-u-s-foreign-policy-mutually-assured-destruction-vs-mutually-assured-respect-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 45

September 16, 2011 12:33 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 45, September 14, 2011

Segment 0: Obama Proposes Tax Increases To Pay For Jobs/Stimulus Spending Package–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/pronk-pops-show-45-september-14-2011-segment-0-obama-proposes-tax-increases-to-pay-for-jobsstimulus-spending-package-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2001&preview_nonce=1a7248d513

Segment 1: Republican Debate September 12, 2011–Tea Party–CNN–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/pronk-pops-show-45-september-14-2011-segment-1-republican-debate-september-12-2011-tea-party-cnn-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 44

September 08, 2011 10:22 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 44, September 7, 2011

Segment 0: Union Thug Hoffa Threatens To Take Out The Tea Party At Labor Day Rally–Obama “Proud” of Hoffa–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/pronk-pops-show-44-september-7-2011-segment-0-union-thug-hoffa-threatens-to-take-out-the-tea-party-at-labor-day-rally%E2%80%93obama-%E2%80%9Cproud%E2%80%9D-of-hoffa%E2%80%93videos/

Segment 1: No Hope: Consumer Confidence Craters–No Change: Official Unemployment Rate Above 8% and Total Unemployment Rate Above 15% For Entire Obama Administration–Great Obama Recession Economy (GORE)–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/pronk-pops-show-44-september-7-2011-segment-1-no-hope-consumer-confidence-craters-no-change-unemployment-rate-above-8-for-entire-obama-administration-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1982&preview_nonce=59be205bae

Pronk Pops Show 43

August 31, 2011 03:19 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 43, August 31, 2011

Segment 0: Remembering The 9/11 First Responders–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/pronk-pops-show-43-august-31-2011-segment-0-remembering-the-911-first-responders-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1925&preview_nonce=fe14e323f6

Segment 1: The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index Craters: 59.2 In July To 44.5 In August–Lowest Since April 2009!

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/pronk-pops-show-43-august-31-2011-segement-1-the-conference-boards-consumer-confidence-index-craters-59-2-in-july-to-44-5-in-august-lowest-since-april-2009/?preview=true&preview_id=1930&preview_nonce=08e5256d62

Segment 2: U.S. Economy On The Verge Of A Recession–Second Quarter GDP Growth Rate Revised Down From 1.3% to 1.0%–Bernanke Advocates Fiscal Stimulus–No QE3 For Now–Consumer Confidence Craters–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/pronk-pops-show-43-august-31-2011-segment-2-u-s-economy-on-the-verge-of-a-recession-second-quarter-gdp-growth-rate-revised-down-from-1-3-to-1-0-bernanke-advocates-fiscal-stimulus-no-qe3-for-no/

Segment 3: Obama’s Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Gallup Poll Low Of 26%–Republican Presidential Candidates Romney, Perry, Paul and Bachmann Attack Obama’s Job Creation Record–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/pronk-pops-show-43-august-31-2011-segment-4-obamas-approval-rating-on-economy-hits-new-gallup-poll-low-of-26-republican-presidential-candidates-romney-perry-paul-and-bachmann-attack-obama/

Pronk Pops Show 42

August 24, 2011 03:25 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 42, August 24, 2011

Segment 0: Malcolm Gladwell–Outliers: The Story of Success–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/pronk-pops-show-42-august-24-2011-segment-0-malcolm-gladwell-outliers-the-story-of-success-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1870&preview_nonce=218c3e949e

Segment 1: Obama’s Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Gallup Poll Low Of 26%–Republican Presidential Candidates Romney, Perry, Paul and Bachmann Attack Obama’s Job Creation Record–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/pronk-pops-show-42-august-24-2011-segment-1-obamas-approval-rating-on-economy-hits-new-gallup-poll-low-of-26-republican-presidential-candidates-romney-perry-paul-and-bachmann-attack-obama/?preview=true&preview_id=1872&preview_nonce=5af449005a

Pronk Pops Show 41

August 17, 2011 04:23 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 41, August 17, 2011

Segment 0: 2011 Iowa Straw Poll: Bachmann knocks off Pawlenty, Paul builds momentum, Perry crashes party—Show me the money!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/pronk-pops-show-41-august-16-2011-segment-0-2011-iowa-straw-poll-bachmann-knocks-off-pawlenty-paul-builds-momentum-perry-crashes-party%E2%80%94show-me-the-money-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1802&preview_nonce=da6c20c0ed

Segment 1: Beyond Top Tier–First In The Hearts and Minds Of The American People and Founding Fathers–The One–Ron Paul–Restoring Liberty, Peace and Prosperity–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/pronk-pops-show-41-august-17-2011-segment-1-beyond-top-tier-first-in-the-hearts-and-minds-of-the-american-people-and-founding-fathers-the-one-ron-paul-restoring-liberty-peace-and-prosperity/

Segment 2 : It’s Time For A Permanent, Pervasive and Predictable Stimulus Package–The FairTax–Launching A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/pronk-pops-show-41-august-17-2011-segment-3-it%E2%80%99s-time-for-a-permanent-pervasive-and-predictable-stimulus-package%E2%80%93the-fairtax%E2%80%93launching-a-peace-and-prosperity-economy/

Pronk Pops Show 40

August 10, 2011 03:35 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show, August 10, 2011

Segment 0: The Warfare and Welfare Economy Worsens With 30 Americans Killed and Over 45 Million Americans On Food Stamps–American People Want A Peace and Prosperity Economy–A Paycheck Not Food Stamps–Stop Out Of Control Spending On Government Interventions Abroad and At Home–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/pronk-pops-show-40-august-10-2011-the-warfare-and-welfare-economy-worsens-with-32-americans-killed-and-over-45-million-americans-on-food-stamps%E2%80%93american-people-want-a-peace-and-prosperity-e/?preview=true&preview_id=1702&preview_nonce=c9b76309ce

Segment 1: More GORE–Great Obama Recession Economy–Government Treasury Securities Downgraded From AAA to AA+ With A Negative Outlook By Standard & Poor’s Rating Agency–Too Little Too Late–The Austrian School of Economics Was Right!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/pronk-pops-show-40-august-10-2011-segment-1-more-gore-great-obama-recession-economy-government-treasury-securites-downgraded-from-aaa-to-aa-with-a-negative-outlook-by-standard-poors-rat/

Pronk Pops Show 39

August 03, 2011 04:00 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 39, August 3, 2011

Segement 0: Will Tea Party Caucus Vote As A Block Against Democratic and Republican Establishment Compromise Bill On Raising National Debt Ceiling By $900 Billion, Adding Over $7,000 Billion To National Debt In The Next Ten Years Plus A Huge Tax Hike in 2013?–The American People Would Like To Know!–Videos

For Addition Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/pronk-pops-show-38-august-3-2011-segement-0-will-tea-party-caucus-vote-as-a-block-against-democratic-and-republican-establishment-compromise-bill-on-raising-national-debt-ceiling-by-900-billion/

Segment 1: The Second Obama Recession Starts Or The Great Obama Depression Continues–The Growth Rate of Gross Domestic Product Declines For Four Consecutive Quarters–The Economy Has Peaked And Entered A Period Of Stagflation–Rising Prices, Unemployment And Obama Misery Index!–Ron Paul To The Rescue?–Videos

For Addition Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/pronk-pops-show-39-august-3-2011-segment-1-the-second-obama-recession-starts-or-the-great-obama-depression-continues%E2%80%93the-growth-rate-of-gross-domestic-product-declines-for-four-consecutive/

Pronk Pops Show 38

July 27, 2011 03:17 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 38, July 27, 2011

Segment 0: Tea Party Democrats, Republicans, and Independents Betrayed–Tell The Democratic and Republican Establishments To Balance The Budget and Cut The Debt Ceiling–Just Say No To Obama, Reid, Boehner and Ryan Unbalanced Budgets–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/pronk-pops-show-38-july-27-2011-segment-0-tea-party-democrats-republicans-and-independents-betrayed-tell-the-democratic-and-republican-establishments-to-balance-the-budget-and-cut-the-debt-ceil/

Segment 1: It’s Time For A Permanent, Prevasive and Predictable Stimulus Package–The FairTax–Launching A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/pronk-pops-show-38-july-27-2011-segment-1-segment-1-it%E2%80%99s-time-for-a-permanent-prevasive-and-predictable-stimulus-package%E2%80%93the-fairtax%E2%80%93launching-a-peace-and-prosperity-econ/

Pronk Pops Show 37

July 21, 2011 03:44 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 37, July 21, 2011, Part 1

Segment 0: President Obama Lies and Scares People On Social Security–Stop Spending and Balance The Budget!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/pronk-pops-show-37-july-20-2011-segment-0-president-obama-lies-and-scares-people-on-social-security-stop-spending-and-balance-the-budget-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 1: The American People’s Solution To Economic Stagnation: Increase National Debt Ceiling By $2,000 Billion To $16,300 Billion In Exchange For Passage of A Balanced Budget Amendment And The FairTax Bills And Repealing The Income Tax 16th Amendment To U.S. Constitution–A Balanced, Fair And Transparent Approach To Creating Jobs and Growing A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/pronk-pops-show-37-july-20-2011-segment-1-the-american-people%E2%80%99s-solution-to-economic-stagnation-increase-national-debt-ceiling-by-2000-billion-to-16300-billion-in-exchange-for-passage/

Part 2 Segments 2, 3 and 4 will be broadcast next Wednesday, July 27, 2011 from 3-5pm and posted on Thursday, July 28, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 36

July 13, 2011 04:23 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 36, July 13, 2011

Segment 0: Lipstick On A Pig–Great Obama Depression– Deeper and Longer–Official U-3 Unemployment Rate Hits 9.2% In June 2011 With 14 Million Unemployed and Total Unemployment Rate U-6 Hits 16.2% With Over 24.8 Million Americans Seeking Full Time Job–Obama Is Not Working–2012–End An Error!–Fire Obama–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-0-lipstick-on-a-pig-great-obama-depression-deeper-and-longer-official-u-3-unemployment-rate-hits-9-2-in-june-2011-with-14-million-unemployed-and-total-u/?preview=true&preview_id=1359&preview_nonce=35f48d29ca

Segment 1: Gretchen Morgenson & Joshua Rosner–Reckless Endangerment: How Outsized Ambition, Greed, and Corruption Led To Economic Armageddon–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-1-gretchen-morgenson-joshua-rosner-reckless-endangerment-how-outsized-ambition-greed-and-corruption-led-to-economic-armageddon-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1370&preview_nonce=a92ff3f2ca

Segment 2: Jim Rogers, Peter Schiff, Marc Farber and Ron Paul On The National Debt Ceiling and Balancing The Budget–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-3-2011-segment-2-ron-paul-on-the-national-debt-ceiling-and-balancing-the-budget-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1377&preview_nonce=51b47fd93e

Segment 3: Obama’s Gungate: Operation Fast and Furious–Arming Mexican Drug Cartels and Criminals–Killing American and Mexican Citizens–A Pretext For The Ultimate Aim of Disarming The American People and Repealing the Second Amendment–Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, FBI, BATFE, ICE and DEA Coverup and Stonewalling–Call For Special Prosecutor–President Obama and Attorney General Holder Should Be Impeached For Obstruction of Justice–Videos–Updated

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-3-obamas-gungate-operation-fast-and-furious-arming-mexican-drug-cartels-and-criminals-killing-american-and-mexican-citizens-a-pretext-for-the-ultimate/?preview=true&preview_id=1366&preview_nonce=811986bc80

Segment 4: Ron Paul won’t seek re election for Congress–Why? Can You Say–President Ron Paul–Vote For A Committed and Principled Constitutionalist–The Peace and Prosperity Candidate For President–Ron Paul–Videos

For additional information and videos:
http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/13/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-4-ron-paul-won%E2%80%99t-seek-re-election-for-congress%E2%80%93why-can-you-say%E2%80%93president-ron-paul%E2%80%93vote-for-a-committed-and-principled-const/?preview=true&preview_id=1406&preview_nonce=16c661faf2

Pronk Pops Show 35

July 06, 2011 03:44 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 35, July 6, 2015

Segment 0: The Meaning of Independence Day–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-0-the-meaning-of-independence-day-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1327&preview_nonce=d099da9d31

Segment 1: The Legal Standard In A Murder Case: Prove It Beyond A Reasonable Doubt–Suspicion And Opinion Is Not Enough–Casey Anthony Murder Case–Not Guilty–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-5-2011-segment-1-the-legal-standard-in-a-murder-case-prove-it-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt-suspicion-and-opinion-is-not-enough-casey-anthony-murder-case-not-quilty-videos/

Segment 2: George Bureau of Investigations Finds Atlanta School Teachers and Principals Cheating Scandal:Raised Students Scores On Tests –Government Corrupt Schools–

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-2-george-bureau-of-investigations-finds-atlanta-school-teachers-and-principals-cheating-scandalraised-students-scores-on-tests-government-corrupt-schools/

Segment 3: Obama’s Marxist Class Warfare On Millionaires and Billionaires–Tax The Job Creators–President’s Unbalanced Budget Would Result In A Big $1,100 Billion Deficit In Fiscal Year 2012–This Is Obama’s So-Called Balanced Approach–Obama Is Not Working–Fire Obama Right Now!–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-3-obamas-marxist-class-warfare-on-millionaires-and-billionaires-tax-the-job-creators-presidents-unbalanced-budget-would-result-in-a-big-1100-billion/

Pronk Pops Show 34

June 29, 2011 03:38 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 34, June 29, 2011

Segment 0: Sexist Elitist Chris Wallace Asks Michele Backmann Are You A Flake?–Chris, Are You A Wimp?–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-0-sexist-elitist-chris-wallace-asks-michele-backmann-are-you-a-flake-chris-are-you-a-wimp-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1287&preview_nonce=d47e8281df

Segment 1: Is Ron Paul An Isolationist–No–He Is For Free Trade and A Nonterventionist Foreign Policy–Are The NeoCons Warmongers–Yes–Aggressive Interventionist Foreign Policy–Empire or Nation Building!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-1-is-ron-paul-an-isolationist-no-he-is-for-free-trade-and-a-nonterventionist-foreign-policy-are-the-neocons-warmongers-yes-aggressive-interventist-fore/?preview=true&preview_id=1295&preview_nonce=17ff44ad0c

Segment 2: Cut, Cap, And Balance Pledge–The Washington D.C. Howdy Doody Debt Ceiling Show–“Say Kids What Time Is It?”–Howdy Doody Time–Fiscal Year 2020 Balanced Budget Time–Not Serious–Send In The Clowns–There Already There!– Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-2-cut-cap-and-balance-pledge-the-washington-d-c-howdy-doody-debt-ceiling-show-say-kids-what-time-is-it-howdy-doody-time-fiscal-year-2020-balance/

Pronk Pops Show 33

June 22, 2011 03:21 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 33, June 22, 2011

Segment 0: Jon Huntsman Launches 2012 Candidacy for President At Liberty Park–Should Become A Democrat Like John V. Lindsay And Run Against President Obama in 2012!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/pronk-pops-show-june-22-2011-segment-0-jon-huntsman-launches-2012-candidacy-for-president-at-liberty-park%e2%80%93should-become-a-democrat-like-john-v-lindsay-and-run-against-president-obama-in-2/

Segment 1: Republican Candidates For President Romney, Cain, and Johnson Refuse To Sign Pro-Life Citizen’s Pledge–While Sarah Palin’s Trig’s Creator E-Mail Moves Millions–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/pronk-pops-show-june-22-2011-segment-1-republican-candidates-for-president-romney-cain-and-johnson-refuse-to-sign-pro-life-citizens-pledge-while-sarah-palins-trigs-creator-e-mail-moves-mi/

Segment 2: Rick Perry/Sarah Palin Republican Establishment Candidate Ticket vs. Ron Paul/Michele Bachmann Republican Constitutional Candidate Ticket for the 2012 Presidential Race–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-2-rick-perrysarah-palin-republican-establishment-candidate-ticket-vs-ron-paulmichele-bachmann-republican-constitutional-candidate-ticket-for-the-2012-pr/

Segment 3: The Next President Of The United States Tells Truth To Power At Republican Leadership Conference–Great Speech!

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-3-the-next-president-of-the-united-states-tells-truth-to-power-at-republican-leadership-conference-great-speech/

Segment 4: Bloomberg Poll Bad News For Obama–Only 30% Certain They Will Vote For Obama in 2012!–66% Think Country On The Wrong Track!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-4-bloomberg-poll-bad-news-for-obama-only-30-certain-they-will-vote-for-obama-in-2012-66-think-country-on-the-wrong-track-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 32

June 15, 2011 03:10 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 32, June 15, 2011

Segment 0: Money, Organization, Message, Momentum, Ambition–MOMMA–You Need MOMMA To Win A Presidential Race!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-segment-0-money-organization-message-momentum-ambition-momma-you-need-momma-to-win-a-presidential-race-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1173&preview_nonce=d056ccee9f

Segment 1: Republican Presidential Debate In New Hampshire June 13, 2011–American People The Winner–Obama The Loser–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-segment-1-republican-presidential-debate-in-new-hampshire-june-13-2011%E2%80%93american-people-the-winner%E2%80%93obama-the-loser%E2%80%93videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1176&preview_nonce=0196810e90

Segment 2: The Political Issues of 2012 Elections: #1–Unemployment–Jobs, #2–Government Spending–Balanced Budgets, #3-Tax Reform–The FairTax, #4-Inflation–End The Fed, #5-Wars–Bring The Troops Home–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-
segment-2-1-the-issues-unemployment-jobs-2-government-spending-balanced-budgets-3-tax-reform-the-fairtax-4-inflation-end-the-fed-5-wars-bring-the-t/?preview=true&preview_id=1183&preview_nonce=577da72775

Segment 3: Pronk Presidential Prediction–The Winner Is?–The American People!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june15-2011-segment-3-pronk-presidential-prediction-the-winner-is-the-american-people-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1169&preview_nonce=52b4648eff

Pronk Pops Show 31

June 08, 2011 03:17 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 31: June 8, 2011

Segment 0: ENTJ–Know Thyself–This above all: to thine own self be true–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-0-entj%E2%80%93know-thyself%E2%80%93this-above-all-to-thine-own-self-be-true%E2%80%93videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1122&preview_nonce=938bb3c129

Segment 1: A Breach of Public Trust–Hound Dogs–Clinton, Weiner, and Obama–Notorious Habitual Liars–Wake Up–Start A Revolution–Ron Paul–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-1-a-breach-of-public-trust%E2%80%93hound-dogs%E2%80%93clinton-weiner-and-obama%E2%80%93notorious-habitual-liars%E2%80%93wake-up%E2%80%93start-a-revolution%E2%80%93ron-pa/

Segment 2: June 2011–Unemployment Situation Worsens–9.1% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) with 13,900,000 Unemployed and 15.8% Total Unemployment Rate (U-6) With 24,283,000 Americans Looking For Full Time Jobs!–Great Obama Depression (GOD)!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-2-june-2011-unemployment-situation-worsens-9-1-official-unemployment-rate-u-3-with-13900000-unemployed-and-15-8-total-unemployment-rate-u-6-with-24283000-america/

Pronk Pops Show 30

June 02, 2011 01:26 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show, June 2, 2011

Segment 0: The Facebook Effect–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-2-2011-segment-0-the-facebook-effect-videos/

Segment 2: Paul Allen–Idea Man: A Memoir By The Cofounder of Microsoft–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-6-2011-segment-1-paul-allen%E2%80%93idea-man-a-memoir-by-the-cofounder-of-microsoft%E2%80%93videos/

Segment 3: Last Dance For Love–Congress Blocks Debt Limit Hike–For Now–Who Is The Political Class Fooling–Bring The Troops and Jobs Home and Send The Bureaucrats and Big Spenders Home–Save Medicare and Social Security–Hot Stuff–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-2-2011-segment-3-last-dance-for-love%E2%80%93congress-blocks-debt-limit-hike%E2%80%93for-now%E2%80%93who-is-the-political-class-fooling%E2%80%93bring-the-troops-and-jobs-ho/

Pronk Pops Show 29

May 26, 2011 01:12 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 29, May 26, 2011

Segment 1: Herman Cain–The Tea Party Movement Candidate–Running On Cutting Spending, Opposing Higher Debt Ceiling, Enforcing Immigration Laws, Defunding Planned Parenthood, Nominating Pro Life Judges, And Passing The FairTax–Common Sense Solutions!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/23/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-1-herman-cain-the-tea-party-movement-candidate-running-on-cutting-spending-opposing-higher-debt-ceiling-enforcing-immigration-laws-defunding-planned-pa/?preview=true&preview_id=1018&preview_nonce=3fac63d9d6

Segment 2: Taxman Obama’s Hidden Tax Increase On The Rich That Results In Fewer Jobs And Lower Economic Growth vs. Ryan’s Long and Winding Road To Economic Stagnation vs. Senators Lee, DeMint and Paul’s Stairway To Peace and Prosperity With A Balanced Budget!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-2-taxman-obamas-hidden-tax-increase-on-the-rich-that-results-in-fewer-jobs-and-lower-economic-growth-vs-ryans-long-and-winding-road-to-economic-stagnat/

Segment 3: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Addresses Congress–A Lesson In Leadership–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-3-israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-addresses-congress-a-lesson-in-leadership-videos/

Segment 4: Memo To Washington Republican Party Establishment–You Are Not Listening To The American People–Read Our Lips–“Cut Spending and Balance The Budget Starting With Fiscal Year 2012”–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-4-memo-to-washington-republican-party-establishment-you-are-not-listening-to-the-american-people-read-our-lips-cut-spending-and-balance-the-budget-start/

Pronk Pops Show 28

May 18, 2011 04:26 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 28, May 18, 2011

Segment 1: Segment 1: Newt Gingrich Running For President As A Big Government Interventionist Republican Progressive aka Green “Compassionate” Conservative?–Favors Individual Health Care Mandates While Attacking Paul Ryan As A Right Wing Radical Social Engineer For Proposing A Premium Support or $15,000 Voucher System To Save Medicare From Bankruptcy!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-18-2011-segment-1-newt-gingrich-running-for-president-as-a-big-govenment-interventionist-republican-progressive-aka-green-compassionate-conservative-favors-individual/

Segment 2: Leave It To Beaver–Newt Gingrich–The Beaver Puppet of The Republican Washington D.C. Establishment Political Class With It Social Engineered Warfare and Welfare Economy with A $3,500 Billion Unbalanced Budget For Fiscal Year 2012 with Nearly $1,000 Billion In Deficit Spending!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-18-2011-segment-2leave-it-to-beaver-newt-gingrich-the-beaver-puppet-of-the-republican-washington-d-c-establishment-political-class-with-it-social-engineered-warfare-and-w/

Segment 3: Ron Paul Running For President Of The United States in 2012–It Is Official–The Third Time Is The Charm!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-28-2011-segment-3-ron-paul-running-for-president-of-the-united-states-in-2012-it-is-official-the-third-time-is-the-charm-videos/

Segment 4: Ron Paul Is Running For President of The United States In 2012!–The Third Time Is The Charm–A Man Of Integrity–A Candidate For Peace and Prosperity–Neither A Big Government Warfare Republican Nor A Massive Government Welfare Democrat–A Man Of And For The American People–A Tea Party Patriot–Ron Paul–Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-18-2011-segment-4-ron-paul-is-running-for-president-of-the-united-states-in-2012-the-third-time-is-the-charm-a-man-of-integrity-a-candidate-for-peace-and-prosperity-nei/

Pronk Pops Show 27

May 11, 2011 10:13 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 27, May 10, 2011

Segment 1: Bureau of Labor Statistics Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) Increased To 9.0% With 13.7 Million Americans Unemployed and Total Unemployment Rate (U-6) Increased To 15.9% With 24.4 Million Americans Seeking Full Time Job–Economy Adds 244,000 Jobs But Initial Unemployment Claims Hit Eight Month High of 474,000!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/pronk-pops-show-27-may-9-2011-segment-1-bureau-of-labor-statistics-offical-unemployment-rate-u-3-increased-to-9-0-with-13-7-million-americans-unemployed-and-total-unemployment-rate-u-6-increas/

Segment 2: OMI-Obama Misery Index–U.S. Misery Index Is Rising As Both The Unemployment Rate and Inflation Rate Increase!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/10/pronk-pops-show-27-may-10-2011-segment-2-omi-obama-misery-index-u-s-misery-index-is-rising-as-both-the-unemployment-rate-and-inflation-rate-increase-vidoes/

Segment 3: Segment 3: Speaker Boehner’s Address to the Economic Club of New York on Jobs, Debt, Gas Prices–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/10/pronk-pops-show-27-may-10-2011-segment-3-speaker-boehners-address-to-the-economic-club-of-new-york-on-jobs-debt-gas-prices/

Pronk Pops Show 26

May 06, 2011 10:14 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 26, May 5, 2011

Segment 1: How Did Bin Laden Bankrupt America?–Was Osama Bin Landen Executed For Bankrupting America?–Yes, President Obama Wants The Credit For Bankrupting America!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/pronk-pops-show-26-may-3-2011-segment-1-how-did-bin-laden-bankrupt-america%E2%80%93was-osama-bin-landen-executed-for-bankrupting-america%E2%80%93yes-president-obama-wants-the-credit-for-bankrup/

Segment 2:Segment 2: President Obama Is The Reason Your Gasoline Prices Are Going Up!–American People Favor Drilling For Oil and Gas!–Drill Baby Drill–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/pronk-pops-show-26-may-3-2011-segment-2/

Pronk Pops Show 25

April 27, 2011 11:28 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 25, April 26, 2011

Segment 0: Eva Cassidy–A Singer’s Singer

Segment 1: Ron Paul Is Running For President of The United States In 2012!–The Third Time Is The Charm–A Man Of Integrity–A Candidate For Peace and Prosperity–Neither A Big Government Warfare Republican Nor A Massive Government Welfare Democrat–A Man Of And For The American People–A Tea Party Patriot–Ron Paul–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/26/pronk-pops-show-25-april-26-2011-segment-0-eva-cassidy-a-singers-singer-segment-1-ron-paul-is-running-for-president-of-the-united-states-in-2012%E2%80%93the-third-time-is-the-charm%E2%80%93a/?preview=true&preview_id=808&preview_nonce=d3d9842e9a

Segment 3: President Obama Is The Reason Your Gasoline Prices Are Going Up!–American People Favor Drilling For Oil and Gas!–Drill Baby Drill–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/26/pronk-pops-show-25-april-26-2011-segment-3-president-obama-is-the-reason-your-gasoline-prices-are-going-up-american-people-favor-drilling-for-oil-and-gas-drill-baby-drill-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 24

April 20, 2011 12:47 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 24: April 19, 2011

Segment 0: S&P Rating Outlook Changed From “Stable” To “Negative” For U.S. Treasury Debt–Videos

Segment 1: Who is John Galt? Who is Ayn Rand–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/17/pronk-pops-show-24-april-19-2011-segment-1-who-is-john-galt-who-is-ayn-rand-videos/

Segment 2: President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Speech Of April 13, 2011–Eat The Rich And Killing The American Dream Class Warfare–Cuts National Security Spending and Raise Taxes On The Rich–Produces Massive Deficits, National Debt, and Higher Unemployment For 12 More Years–Progressive Radical Socialist Economic Stagflation–Videos

For additional information and videos:
http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/18/pronk-pops-show-24-april-18-2011-segment-2-president-obamas-fiscal-year-2012-budget-speech-of-april-13-2011-eat-the-rich-and-killing-the-american-dream-class-warfare-cuts-national-security-sp/

Segment 3: The FairTax (National Consumption Sales Tax) vs. The Flat Tax (One Rate Federal Income Tax)–Who Pays The Most Federal Individual Income Tax? Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/18/pronk-pops-show-24-april-19-2011-segment-3-the-fairtax-national-consumption-sales-tax-vs-the-flat-tax-one-rate-federal-income-tax-who-pays-the-most-federal-individual-income-tax-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 23

April 13, 2011 10:31 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 23: April 12, 2011

Segment 0: Sidney Lumet–Rest In Peace–Videos

Segment 1: Tea Party Movement Demands Passage of Balanced Budget Amendment and The FairTax As The Price For Raising The National Statutory Debt Limit of $ 14,294,000,000 One Last Time By $1,000,000,000,000!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/tea-party-movement-demands-passage-of-balance-budget-amendment-and-balanced-budget-rule-as-the-price-for-raising-the-national-debt-ceiling-one-last-time-by-1000000000000-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=701&preview_nonce=5e679dbc1d

Segment 2: The FairTax (National Consumption Sales Tax) vs. The Flat Tax (One Rate Federal Income Tax)–Who Pays The Most Federal Individual Income Tax? Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/pronk-pops-show-23-april-12-2011-segment-2the-fairtax-national-consumption-sales-tax-vs-the-flat-tax-one-rate-federal-income-tax-who-pays-the-most-federal-individual-income-tax-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 22 (Part 2)

April 08, 2011 11:16 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 22, April 7, 2011

Segment 1: 3,500,000 Million Americans Unemployed in March 2011 Still Exceeds Great Depression High of 13,000,000 In March 1933–The Obama Depressions Continues–Bureau of Labor Statistics: 8.8% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) vs. Gallup Unemployment Rate of 10.0%–Nonfarm Payroll Increased By 216,000–The Government Makes The Depression Worse!–Videos

Segment 2: Obama’s Anti-American, Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Growth, Anti-Jobs, and Anti-Security Energy Policy–Videos

Segment 3: Republican Establishment Will Propose A Ten Year $6,200 Billion Cut In Spending Over Ten Years–The Problem Is It Does Not Balance The Budget For Another Five Years At The Earliest–Tea Party Movement Demands Balanced Budgets Starting In 2012 For The Next Ten Years!–A Jet Plane To Prosperity Not A Path To Prosperity–Videos

Segment 4: Just One More Thing Congressman Ryan: When Does The Republican’s Path To Prosperity Balance The Budget?–The Twelth of Never!–Videos

For additional information and videos on the above segments:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/pronk-pops-show-22-april-5-2011-segment-113500000-million-americans-unemployed-in-march-2011-still-exceeds-great-depression-high-of-13000000-in-march-1933%E2%80%93the-obama-depressions-contin/

Pronk Pops Show 22 (Part 1)

April 07, 2011 10:41 AM PDT

Pronk Pops: Show 22, April 7, 2011

Segment 0: Glenn Beck Ending His Show At Fox News

Segment 1: 3,500,000 Million Americans Unemployed in March 2011 Still Exceeds Great Depression High of 13,000,000 In March 1933–The Obama Depressions Continues–Bureau of Labor Statistics: 8.8% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) vs. Gallup Unemployment Rate of 10.0%–Nonfarm Payroll Increased By 216,000–The Government Makes The Depression Worse!–Videos

Segment 2: Obama’s Anti-American, Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Growth, Anti-Jobs, and Anti-Security Energy Policy–Videos

Segment 3: Republican Establishment Will Propose A Ten Year $6,200 Billion Cut In Spending Over Ten Years–The Problem Is It Does Not Balance The Budget For Another Five Years At The Earliest–Tea Party Movement Demands Balanced Budgets Starting In 2012 For The Next Ten Years!–A Jet Plane To Prosperity Not A Path To Prosperity–Videos

Segment 4: Just One More Thing Congressman Ryan: When Does The Republican’s Path To Prosperity Balance The Budget?–The Twelth of Never!–Videos

For additional information and videos on the above segments:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/pronk-pops-show-22-april-5-2011-segment-113500000-million-americans-unemployed-in-march-2011-still-exceeds-great-depression-high-of-13000000-in-march-1933%E2%80%93the-obama-depressions-contin/

Pronk Pops Show 21

March 29, 2011 03:41 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 21, March 29, 2010

Segment 1: The Truth And Consequences About Undeclared Wars–Real Strange Bedfellows–Obama Allies U.S. with Libyan Rebels Including Islamic Jihadists, Moslem Brotherhood, and Al-Qaeda!–Give Peace A Chance–AC-130 Gunship–A-10 Warthogs–F-15E Strike Eagles and Special Operation Smash Squads

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/03/29/pronk-pops-show-21-march-29-2011-the-truth-and-consequences-about-undeclared-wars%E2%80%93real-strange-bedfellows%E2%80%93obama-allies-u-s-with-libyan-rebels-including-islamic-jihadists-moslem-b/

Pronk Pops Show 20

March 23, 2011 12:02 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 20: March 22, 2011

Segment 1:F-15 Crashes In Libya

Segment 2surprisedne Unconstitutional and Undeclared War Too Many: The Great Pretender, Peace Candidate And Noble Peace Prize Winner, President Barack Obama Undeclared War On Libya’s Muammar Ghaddafi In Defense Of Libyian Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Rebels Linked To al-Qaeda and The BP Libyian Oil Deal Linked To Obama Campaign Contributions–A Political Payoff!–Obama Has To Go In 2012–Videos

Segment 3:Earthquake Damages Japanese Nuclear Plant At Fukushima Daiichi, Four Explosions and Four Nuclear Reactors Flooded With Seawater To Contain Release Of Radioactive Material and Plant Released Radioactive Materials To Stop Pressure Buildup–Partial Meltdown Of Nuclear Core Feared–Radioactive Material Escaping From Plant–Over 250,000 Ordered Evacuated From 20 Kilometer (12.4 Miles) Radius From Plant–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/pronk-pops-show-20-march-22-2011-segment-1-f-15-crashes-in-libya-segment-2-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=569&preview_nonce=40500c814b

Pronk Pops Show 19

March 09, 2011 10:57 AM PST

Pronk Pops Show 19: March 8, 2011

Segment 1: The Washington Political Elites of Both Parties Are Not Serious About Balancing The Federal Budget And Funding Entitlement Liabilities–Send In The Clowns–Don’t Bother There Here–Videos

Segment 2, Gallup–U.S. Unemployment Hits 10.3% In February 2011 Vs. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) U.S. Unemployment Rate Declined By .1% To 8.9% in February 2011 With Job Creation of 192,000 In February 2011–Over 13.7 Million Americans Unemployed More Than Worse Month of Great Depression!

For more information and videos related to this show click on links below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/pronk-pops-show-19-march-8-2011segment-1-the-washington-political-elites-of-both-parties-are-not-serious-about-balancing-the-federal-budget-and-funding-entitlement-liabilities-send-in-the-clowns/

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/pronk-pops-show-19-march-8-2010-segment-2-gallup-u-s-unemployment-hits-10-3-in-february-2011-vs-bureau-of-labor-statistics-bls-u-s-unemployment-rate-declined-by-1-to-8-9-in-february-2011-wi/

Pronk Pops Show 18

March 03, 2011 03:35 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 18: March 3, 2011

Segment 1: Remembering The Brooklyn Dodgers and Duke Snider

Segment 2: The National Debt Will Hit $20,000,000,000,000 By 2020!

Segment 3 Public Sector Unions vs. The America People: Replacing The American Dream With The Socialist Union Nightmare

For additional information and videos on the above segments:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/pronk-pops-show-18-march-1-2011-remembering-the-brooklyn-dodgers-and-duke-snider-the-union-corruption-of-government-delusion-of-the-unconstrained-vision-of-unlimited-government-and-the-2000000/

Pronk Pop Show 17

February 22, 2011 03:47 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 17: February 22, 2011

Black History Month–Progressives–Eugenics–Black Population Control–Abortion–Black Genocide–Planned Parenthood–Barack Obama

For more information and videos relating to the show:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/pronk-pops-show-17-february-22-2011-black-history-month-progressives-eugenics-black-population-control-abortion-black-genocide-planned-parenthood-barack-obama-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 16

February 15, 2011 03:49 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 16: February 15, 2011

Conservative Political Action Conference 2011

President Obama’s Saint Valentine’s Massacre of The American People–Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Buster–Spending $3,729 Billion–Taxes $2,627 Billion–Deficit $1,101 Billion–Dead On Arrival–DOA– 3 Million Tea Party Patriots To March On Washington D.C. On Friday, April 15, 2011 In Protest!

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/pronk-pops-show-16-february-15-2011-conservative-political-action-conference-cpac-2011-and-president-obamas-saint-valentines-massacre-of-the-american-people-fiscal-year-2012-budget-buster-s/

Pronk Pops Show 15: Hour 3

February 10, 2011 03:32 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 15:February 8,2011, Hour 3

Lies, Damn Lies, Statistics, and Obama’s Unbelievable Unemployment Numbers

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/pronk-pops-show-15-february-8-2011-from-texas-snow-storm-to-washington-snow-job-lies-damn-lies-statistics-and-obamas-unbelievable-unemployment-numbers-obama-care-unconstitutional-and-void-pa-2/

Pronk Pops Show 15: Hour 2

February 10, 2011 03:23 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 15: February 8, 2011 Hour 2

Rolling Power Outages in Texas

Obama Care Declared Unconstitutional and Void By Federal Judge

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/pronk-pops-show-15-february-8-2011-from-texas-snow-storm-to-washington-snow-job-lies-damn-lies-statistics-and-obamas-unbelievable-unemployment-numbers-obama-care-unconstitutional-and-void-pa/

Pronk Pops Show 15: Hour 1

February 10, 2011 03:10 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 15: February 8,2011, Hour 1

Super Storm and Super Bowl In Dallas, Texas

Man-Made Carbon Dioxide Emission and Global Warming–Science vs. Politics

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/pronk-pops-show-15-february-8-2011-from-texas-snow-storm-to-washington-snow-job-lies-damn-lies-statistics-and-obamas-unbelievable-unemployment-numbers-obama-care-unconstitutional-and-void-pa/

Pronk Pops Show 14

January 28, 2011 02:10 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 14: January 27, 2011

The Big Lie and Free Speech

President Obama’s State of the Union Campaign Speech

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/pronk-pops-show-14-january-27-2011-the-big-lie-and-free-speech-and-president-obamas-state-of-the-union-campaign-speech-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 13

December 09, 2010 01:22 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 13: December 9, 2010

Latest News Update on WikiLeaks

Federal Reserve Unconventional Monetary Policy

President Obama and Republicans Agree To Two Year Tax Rate Extension and

One Year Unemployment Benefit Extension–More Deficit Spending and Debt!

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/pronk-pops-show-december-9-2010-president-obama-and-republican-cut-tax-and-spend-deal-time-for-serious-spending-cuts-balance-budgets-and-the-flat-tax/

Pronk Pops Show 12

December 08, 2010 04:18 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 12: December 8, 2010

News Update On WikiLeaks and Julian Assange

The Chairman of The Federal Reserve and Quantitative Easing 2

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/pronk-pops-show-12-december-8-2010-news-update-on-julian-assange-wikileaks-ben-benanke-the-fed-barack-obama-tax-and-spend-democrats-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 11

December 03, 2010 02:18 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 11: December 3, 2010

News and Commentary On November 2010 Unemployment Rate and Level Statistics

WikiLeaks

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/pronk-pops-show-11-december-3-2010-news-unemployment-rate-up-to-9-8-with-over-15-million-unemployed-wikileaks-food-prices-rising-the-fairtax-videos-2/?preview=true&preview_id=245&preview_nonce=e49c7ff2d2

Pronk Pops Show 10

December 02, 2010 12:35 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 10: December 1, 2010

Update on new TSA Airport Screening Procedures

Portland, Oregon Terrorist Bomber Arrested by F.B.I.

WikiLeaks Posts Department of State Cables

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:
http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/11/24/pronk-pops-show-10-november-24-2010-food-prices-rising-fairtax-updates-on-tsa-and-quantitative-easing-money-printing-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 9

November 19, 2010 02:23 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 9: November 19, 2010

Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke Responds To Critics of Monetary Policy

Transportation Security Administration or TSA New Screening Procedures:
Full Body Scanners and Extended Pat-Downs

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/pronk-pops-show-9-november-17-2010-quantitative-easing-2-update-g-20-summit-a-bust-tsa-tyrants-scanning-americans-videos/

Pronk Pops Commentary 1

November 11, 2010 03:42 PM PST

Pronk Pops Commentary 1: November 11, 2010

Stop Federal Reserve Quantitative Easing or Money Printing

Pronk Pops Show 8

November 10, 2010 04:24 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 8: November 10, 2010

Tea Party Major Issues: Jobs, Spending, Deficits, Debt, Taxes, Health Care and Illegal Immigration

Tea Party Stars: Senators: Rand Paul and Marco Rubio

Republican Tea Party Test: Cutting Federal Spending By Over $1,000 Billion To Balance The Budget For Fiscal Years 2011, 2012, and 2013.

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/11/10/pronk-pops-show-8-november-10-2010-fiscal-policy-cut-spending-balanced-budgets-no-new-taxes-monetary-policy-no-quantitative-easing-or-printing-money-hidden-tax-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 7

November 09, 2010 02:45 PM PST

Pronk Pops Show 7: November 9, 2010

Unemployment News

Tea Party Effect On 2010 Elections

Key Issues: Federal Budget Deficits and National Debt

Cutting Federal Government Spending and Balancing The Federal Budget

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/11/05/pronk-pops-show-7-november-8-2010-the-tea-party-effect-what-is-next-and-update-on-feds-qe2/

Pronk Pops Show 6

November 03, 2010 03:58 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 6: November 3, 2010

Winning Elections With MOMMA (Money, Organization, Message, Momentum, Ambition) and The Tea Party Movement Effect

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/11/03/pronk-pops-show-6-november-3-2010-winning-elections-with-momma-money-organization-message-momentum-ambition-and-the-tea-party-movement-effect-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 5

October 28, 2010 03:49 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 5: October 27, 2010

Democratic Party’s National Attack Ad Campaign on Candidates and the Flat Tax

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/pronk-pops-show-5-october-27-2010-democratic-party-national-attack-ad-campaign-on-fairtax-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 4

October 28, 2010 03:43 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 4: October 20, 2010

Money, Quantitative Easing and Inflation in the United States Economy

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/10/20/pronk-pops-number-4-videosquantitive-easying-ii-printing-money-to-finance-federal-govenment/

Pronk Pops Show 3

October 28, 2010 03:32 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 3: October 14, 2010

Unemployment and inflation in the United States economy

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/pronk-pops-show-3-october-14-2010unemployment-and-inflation/

Pronk Pops Show 2

October 28, 2010 03:27 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 2: October 13, 2010

The 10:10 carbon emission ad campaign on climate change

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wliC2Eiwoyw

http://www.1010global.org/uk

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton replacing Vice President Joseph Biden on the 2010 Democratic Party ticket

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/10/05/pronk-pops-number-2-october-6-2010-1010-campaign-the-progressive-radical-socialists-method-of-cutting-carbon-emissions-kill-those-who-disagree-with-you-no-pressure-your-choice-the-big-lie-v/

Pronk Pops Show 1

October 28, 2010 03:01 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 1: September 29, 2010

University of Texas at Austin shooting/suicide

The Tea Party Movement in the United States

For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/pronk-pops-program-number-1-september-29-2010-clips-and-notes-videos/

Give it a listen!

Pronk Pops Show 55:November 23, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 54:November 16, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 53:November 9, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 52:November 2, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 51:October 26, 2011

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22 (Part 2)-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22 (Part 1)

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Republican Party Presidential Debate, November 9, 2011, Rochester, Michigan, CNBC–Videos

Posted on November 10, 2011. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Immigration, Inflation, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Programming, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Talk Radio, Taxes, Tutorials, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (1/11)

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (2/11)

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (3/11)

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (4/11) 

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 5/11) 

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 6/11) 

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (7/11) 

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (8/11)

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (9/11)

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (10/11) 

Republican Presidential Debate Rochester Michigan November 9, 2011 (11/11) 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Shows 1-50, Podcasts or Download–Give It A Listen–Videos

Posted on October 21, 2011. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Art, Babies, Banking, Baseball, Blogroll, Books, Business, Climate, College, Comedy, Communications, Computers, Crime, Cult, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Dirty Bomb, Drug Cartels, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Enivornment, Entertainment, European History, Farming, Federal Government, Films, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Games, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Homes, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Medicine, Microeconomics, Mobile Phones, Monetary Policy, Money, Movies, Music, Natural Gas, Nuclear, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Philosophy, Pistols, Politics, Private Sector, Programming, Public Sector, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Reviews, Rifles, Science, Security, Sports, Strategy, Talk Radio, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Tutorials, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 50:October 19, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 49:October 12, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 48:October 5, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 47:September 28, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 46:September 21, 2011

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-50

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22 (Part 2)-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22 (Part 1)

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Give it a listen!

itunes pic

Pronk Pops Show 50

October 20, 2011 10:06 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 50, October 19, 2011

Segment 0: Ron Paul’s Economic Plan for Restoring America to Peace and Prosperity–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/pronk-pops-show-50-october-19-2011-segment-0-ron-paul%E2%80%99s-economic-plan-for-restoring-america-to-peace-and-prosperity-videos/

Special Guest Interview: Stephen Levine: Chasing and Photographing Thunderstorms

Segment 1: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate in Las Vegas–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/pronk-pops-show-50-october-19-2011-segment-1-segment-1-republican-presidential-candidate-debate-in-las-vegas-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 49

October 12, 2011 04:22 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 49, October 12, 2011

Segment 0: Let a 1,000 Apples Bloom: Creating Unbelievable Products, Wealth and Jobs–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/11/pronk-pops-show-49-october-12-2011-segment-0-let-a-1000-apples-bloom-creating-unbelievable-products-wealth-and-jobs-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2155&preview_nonce=f67fe5a59f

Segment 1: President Obama Beats 62 Year Record Held By Reagan: Unemployment Rate Over 8% For 32 Months and Over 9% For 27 Months!–Average Weeks Unemployed Hits All Time High of 40.5 Weeks!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/pronk-pops-show-49-october-12-2011-segment-1-president-obama-beats-62-year-record-held-by-reagan-unemployment-rate-over-8-for-32-months-and-over-9-for-27-months-average-weeks-unemployed-hits-al/

Pronk Pops Show 48

October 06, 2011 08:47 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 48, October 8, 2011

Segment 0: President Obama In Dallas Tuesday Oct. 4: Collecting Contributions For $1,000,000,000 Propaganda Campaign And Demanding His Jobs Bill Be Passed–More Taxes, More Spending, More Deficits, More Debt, More Unemployment–No Hope, No Change, No Jobs, No Thanks–”How’s That Hopey-Changey Stuff Working Out For Ya?”–Videos

For addition information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/05/pronk-pops-show-48-october-5-2011-segment-0-president-obama-in-dallas-tuesday-oct-4-collecting-contributions-for-1000000000-propaganda-campaign-and-demanding-his-jobs-bill-be-passed%E2%80%93/

Segment 1: Gungate: What did you know and When Did You Know About Operation Fast and Furious And Project Gunrunner– Attorney General Holder and President Obama?

For addition information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/10/05/pronk-pops-show-48-october-5-2011-segment-1-obamas-gungate-what-did-you-know-and-when-did-you-know-about-operation-fast-and-furious-and-project-gunrunner%E2%80%93-attorney-general-holder-and-pr/

Pronk Pops Show 47

September 28, 2011 04:57 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 47, September 28, 2011

Segment 0: Ron Paul On U.S. Foreign Policy–Mutually Assured Destruction vs Mutually Assured Respect –Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/27/pronk-pops-show-47-segment-0-ron-paul-on-u-s-foreign-policy-mutually-assured-destruction-vs-mutually-assured-respect-videos/

Segment 1: Herman Cain Wins Florida Straw Poll: The Cain Mutiny–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/27/pronk-pops-show-47-segment-1-herman-cain-wins-florida-straw-poll-the-cain-mutiny-videos/

Segment 2: Republican Presidential Debate, September 22, 2011–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/27/pronk-pops-show-47-september-28-2011-segment-2-republican-presidential-debate-september-22-2011-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 46

September 21, 2011 04:29 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 46, September 21, 2011

Segment 0: Obama’s Solargate: Solyndra Stimulus Spending Cost Taxpayers An Estimated $535 Million–Crony Capitalism Campaign Contribution Corruption–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/pronk-pops-show-46-september-21-2011-segment-0-obamas-solargate-solyndra-stimulus-spending-cost-taxpayers-an-estimated-535-million-crony-capitalism-campaign-contribution-corruption-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2027&preview_nonce=62baed34f8

Segment 1: Eat The Rich!–Vote Obama In 2012 For More Spending, More Taxes, More Deficits, More Debt, More Unemployment, More Recession–No Hope–No Change–No Deal!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/pronk-pops-show-46-september-21-2011-segment-1-eat-the-rich-vote-obama-in-2012-for-more-spending-more-taxes-more-deficits-more-debt-more-unemployment-more-recession-no-hope-no-change-no/

Segment 2: Ron Paul On U.S. Foreign Policy–Mutually Assured Destruction vs Mutually Assured Respect –Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/pronk-pops-show-46-september-21-2011-segment-2-ron-paul-on-u-s-foreign-policy-mutually-assured-destruction-vs-mutually-assured-respect-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 45

September 16, 2011 12:33 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 45, September 14, 2011

Segment 0: Obama Proposes Tax Increases To Pay For Jobs/Stimulus Spending Package–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/pronk-pops-show-45-september-14-2011-segment-0-obama-proposes-tax-increases-to-pay-for-jobsstimulus-spending-package-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=2001&preview_nonce=1a7248d513

Segment 1: Republican Debate September 12, 2011–Tea Party–CNN–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/pronk-pops-show-45-september-14-2011-segment-1-republican-debate-september-12-2011-tea-party-cnn-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 44

September 08, 2011 10:22 AM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 44, September 7, 2011

Segment 0: Union Thug Hoffa Threatens To Take Out The Tea Party At Labor Day Rally–Obama “Proud” of Hoffa–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/pronk-pops-show-44-september-7-2011-segment-0-union-thug-hoffa-threatens-to-take-out-the-tea-party-at-labor-day-rally%E2%80%93obama-%E2%80%9Cproud%E2%80%9D-of-hoffa%E2%80%93videos/

Segment 1: No Hope: Consumer Confidence Craters–No Change: Official Unemployment Rate Above 8% and Total Unemployment Rate Above 15% For Entire Obama Administration–Great Obama Recession Economy (GORE)–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/pronk-pops-show-44-september-7-2011-segment-1-no-hope-consumer-confidence-craters-no-change-unemployment-rate-above-8-for-entire-obama-administration-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1982&preview_nonce=59be205bae

Pronk Pops Show 43

August 31, 2011 03:19 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 43, August 31, 2011

Segment 0: Remembering The 9/11 First Responders–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/pronk-pops-show-43-august-31-2011-segment-0-remembering-the-911-first-responders-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1925&preview_nonce=fe14e323f6

Segment 1: The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index Craters: 59.2 In July To 44.5 In August–Lowest Since April 2009!

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/pronk-pops-show-43-august-31-2011-segement-1-the-conference-boards-consumer-confidence-index-craters-59-2-in-july-to-44-5-in-august-lowest-since-april-2009/?preview=true&preview_id=1930&preview_nonce=08e5256d62

Segment 2: U.S. Economy On The Verge Of A Recession–Second Quarter GDP Growth Rate Revised Down From 1.3% to 1.0%–Bernanke Advocates Fiscal Stimulus–No QE3 For Now–Consumer Confidence Craters–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/pronk-pops-show-43-august-31-2011-segment-2-u-s-economy-on-the-verge-of-a-recession-second-quarter-gdp-growth-rate-revised-down-from-1-3-to-1-0-bernanke-advocates-fiscal-stimulus-no-qe3-for-no/

Segment 3: Obama’s Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Gallup Poll Low Of 26%–Republican Presidential Candidates Romney, Perry, Paul and Bachmann Attack Obama’s Job Creation Record–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/pronk-pops-show-43-august-31-2011-segment-4-obamas-approval-rating-on-economy-hits-new-gallup-poll-low-of-26-republican-presidential-candidates-romney-perry-paul-and-bachmann-attack-obama/

Pronk Pops Show 42

August 24, 2011 03:25 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 42, August 24, 2011

Segment 0: Malcolm Gladwell–Outliers: The Story of Success–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/pronk-pops-show-42-august-24-2011-segment-0-malcolm-gladwell-outliers-the-story-of-success-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1870&preview_nonce=218c3e949e

Segment 1: Obama’s Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Gallup Poll Low Of 26%–Republican Presidential Candidates Romney, Perry, Paul and Bachmann Attack Obama’s Job Creation Record–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/pronk-pops-show-42-august-24-2011-segment-1-obamas-approval-rating-on-economy-hits-new-gallup-poll-low-of-26-republican-presidential-candidates-romney-perry-paul-and-bachmann-attack-obama/?preview=true&preview_id=1872&preview_nonce=5af449005a

Pronk Pops Show 41

August 17, 2011 04:23 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 41, August 17, 2011

Segment 0: 2011 Iowa Straw Poll: Bachmann knocks off Pawlenty, Paul builds momentum, Perry crashes party—Show me the money!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/pronk-pops-show-41-august-16-2011-segment-0-2011-iowa-straw-poll-bachmann-knocks-off-pawlenty-paul-builds-momentum-perry-crashes-party%E2%80%94show-me-the-money-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1802&preview_nonce=da6c20c0ed

Segment 1: Beyond Top Tier–First In The Hearts and Minds Of The American People and Founding Fathers–The One–Ron Paul–Restoring Liberty, Peace and Prosperity–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/pronk-pops-show-41-august-17-2011-segment-1-beyond-top-tier-first-in-the-hearts-and-minds-of-the-american-people-and-founding-fathers-the-one-ron-paul-restoring-liberty-peace-and-prosperity/

Segment 2 : It’s Time For A Permanent, Pervasive and Predictable Stimulus Package–The FairTax–Launching A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/pronk-pops-show-41-august-17-2011-segment-3-it%E2%80%99s-time-for-a-permanent-pervasive-and-predictable-stimulus-package%E2%80%93the-fairtax%E2%80%93launching-a-peace-and-prosperity-economy/

Pronk Pops Show 40

August 10, 2011 03:35 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show, August 10, 2011

Segment 0: The Warfare and Welfare Economy Worsens With 30 Americans Killed and Over 45 Million Americans On Food Stamps–American People Want A Peace and Prosperity Economy–A Paycheck Not Food Stamps–Stop Out Of Control Spending On Government Interventions Abroad and At Home–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/pronk-pops-show-40-august-10-2011-the-warfare-and-welfare-economy-worsens-with-32-americans-killed-and-over-45-million-americans-on-food-stamps%E2%80%93american-people-want-a-peace-and-prosperity-e/?preview=true&preview_id=1702&preview_nonce=c9b76309ce

Segment 1: More GORE–Great Obama Recession Economy–Government Treasury Securities Downgraded From AAA to AA+ With A Negative Outlook By Standard & Poor’s Rating Agency–Too Little Too Late–The Austrian School of Economics Was Right!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/pronk-pops-show-40-august-10-2011-segment-1-more-gore-great-obama-recession-economy-government-treasury-securites-downgraded-from-aaa-to-aa-with-a-negative-outlook-by-standard-poors-rat/

Pronk Pops Show 39

August 03, 2011 04:00 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 39, August 3, 2011

Segement 0: Will Tea Party Caucus Vote As A Block Against Democratic and Republican Establishment Compromise Bill On Raising National Debt Ceiling By $900 Billion, Adding Over $7,000 Billion To National Debt In The Next Ten Years Plus A Huge Tax Hike in 2013?–The American People Would Like To Know!–Videos

For Addition Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/pronk-pops-show-38-august-3-2011-segement-0-will-tea-party-caucus-vote-as-a-block-against-democratic-and-republican-establishment-compromise-bill-on-raising-national-debt-ceiling-by-900-billion/

Segment 1: The Second Obama Recession Starts Or The Great Obama Depression Continues–The Growth Rate of Gross Domestic Product Declines For Four Consecutive Quarters–The Economy Has Peaked And Entered A Period Of Stagflation–Rising Prices, Unemployment And Obama Misery Index!–Ron Paul To The Rescue?–Videos

For Addition Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/pronk-pops-show-39-august-3-2011-segment-1-the-second-obama-recession-starts-or-the-great-obama-depression-continues%E2%80%93the-growth-rate-of-gross-domestic-product-declines-for-four-consecutive/

Pronk Pops Show 38

July 27, 2011 03:17 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 38, July 27, 2011

Segment 0: Tea Party Democrats, Republicans, and Independents Betrayed–Tell The Democratic and Republican Establishments To Balance The Budget and Cut The Debt Ceiling–Just Say No To Obama, Reid, Boehner and Ryan Unbalanced Budgets–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/pronk-pops-show-38-july-27-2011-segment-0-tea-party-democrats-republicans-and-independents-betrayed-tell-the-democratic-and-republican-establishments-to-balance-the-budget-and-cut-the-debt-ceil/

Segment 1: It’s Time For A Permanent, Prevasive and Predictable Stimulus Package–The FairTax–Launching A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/pronk-pops-show-38-july-27-2011-segment-1-segment-1-it%E2%80%99s-time-for-a-permanent-prevasive-and-predictable-stimulus-package%E2%80%93the-fairtax%E2%80%93launching-a-peace-and-prosperity-econ/

Pronk Pops Show 37

July 21, 2011 03:44 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 37, July 21, 2011, Part 1

Segment 0: President Obama Lies and Scares People On Social Security–Stop Spending and Balance The Budget!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/pronk-pops-show-37-july-20-2011-segment-0-president-obama-lies-and-scares-people-on-social-security-stop-spending-and-balance-the-budget-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 1: The American People’s Solution To Economic Stagnation: Increase National Debt Ceiling By $2,000 Billion To $16,300 Billion In Exchange For Passage of A Balanced Budget Amendment And The FairTax Bills And Repealing The Income Tax 16th Amendment To U.S. Constitution–A Balanced, Fair And Transparent Approach To Creating Jobs and Growing A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/pronk-pops-show-37-july-20-2011-segment-1-the-american-people%E2%80%99s-solution-to-economic-stagnation-increase-national-debt-ceiling-by-2000-billion-to-16300-billion-in-exchange-for-passage/

Part 2 Segments 2, 3 and 4 will be broadcast next Wednesday, July 27, 2011 from 3-5pm and posted on Thursday, July 28, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 36

July 13, 2011 04:23 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 36, July 13, 2011

Segment 0: Lipstick On A Pig–Great Obama Depression– Deeper and Longer–Official U-3 Unemployment Rate Hits 9.2% In June 2011 With 14 Million Unemployed and Total Unemployment Rate U-6 Hits 16.2% With Over 24.8 Million Americans Seeking Full Time Job–Obama Is Not Working–2012–End An Error!–Fire Obama–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-0-lipstick-on-a-pig-great-obama-depression-deeper-and-longer-official-u-3-unemployment-rate-hits-9-2-in-june-2011-with-14-million-unemployed-and-total-u/?preview=true&preview_id=1359&preview_nonce=35f48d29ca

Segment 1: Gretchen Morgenson & Joshua Rosner–Reckless Endangerment: How Outsized Ambition, Greed, and Corruption Led To Economic Armageddon–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-1-gretchen-morgenson-joshua-rosner-reckless-endangerment-how-outsized-ambition-greed-and-corruption-led-to-economic-armageddon-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1370&preview_nonce=a92ff3f2ca

Segment 2: Jim Rogers, Peter Schiff, Marc Farber and Ron Paul On The National Debt Ceiling and Balancing The Budget–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-3-2011-segment-2-ron-paul-on-the-national-debt-ceiling-and-balancing-the-budget-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1377&preview_nonce=51b47fd93e

Segment 3: Obama’s Gungate: Operation Fast and Furious–Arming Mexican Drug Cartels and Criminals–Killing American and Mexican Citizens–A Pretext For The Ultimate Aim of Disarming The American People and Repealing the Second Amendment–Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, FBI, BATFE, ICE and DEA Coverup and Stonewalling–Call For Special Prosecutor–President Obama and Attorney General Holder Should Be Impeached For Obstruction of Justice–Videos–Updated

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-3-obamas-gungate-operation-fast-and-furious-arming-mexican-drug-cartels-and-criminals-killing-american-and-mexican-citizens-a-pretext-for-the-ultimate/?preview=true&preview_id=1366&preview_nonce=811986bc80

Segment 4: Ron Paul won’t seek re election for Congress–Why? Can You Say–President Ron Paul–Vote For A Committed and Principled Constitutionalist–The Peace and Prosperity Candidate For President–Ron Paul–Videos

For additional information and videos:
http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/13/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-4-ron-paul-won%E2%80%99t-seek-re-election-for-congress%E2%80%93why-can-you-say%E2%80%93president-ron-paul%E2%80%93vote-for-a-committed-and-principled-const/?preview=true&preview_id=1406&preview_nonce=16c661faf2

Pronk Pops Show 35

July 06, 2011 03:44 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 35, July 6, 2015

Segment 0: The Meaning of Independence Day–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-0-the-meaning-of-independence-day-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1327&preview_nonce=d099da9d31

Segment 1: The Legal Standard In A Murder Case: Prove It Beyond A Reasonable Doubt–Suspicion And Opinion Is Not Enough–Casey Anthony Murder Case–Not Guilty–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-5-2011-segment-1-the-legal-standard-in-a-murder-case-prove-it-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt-suspicion-and-opinion-is-not-enough-casey-anthony-murder-case-not-quilty-videos/

Segment 2: George Bureau of Investigations Finds Atlanta School Teachers and Principals Cheating Scandal:Raised Students Scores On Tests –Government Corrupt Schools–

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-2-george-bureau-of-investigations-finds-atlanta-school-teachers-and-principals-cheating-scandalraised-students-scores-on-tests-government-corrupt-schools/

Segment 3: Obama’s Marxist Class Warfare On Millionaires and Billionaires–Tax The Job Creators–President’s Unbalanced Budget Would Result In A Big $1,100 Billion Deficit In Fiscal Year 2012–This Is Obama’s So-Called Balanced Approach–Obama Is Not Working–Fire Obama Right Now!–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-3-obamas-marxist-class-warfare-on-millionaires-and-billionaires-tax-the-job-creators-presidents-unbalanced-budget-would-result-in-a-big-1100-billion/

Pronk Pops Show 34

June 29, 2011 03:38 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 34, June 29, 2011

Segment 0: Sexist Elitist Chris Wallace Asks Michele Backmann Are You A Flake?–Chris, Are You A Wimp?–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-0-sexist-elitist-chris-wallace-asks-michele-backmann-are-you-a-flake-chris-are-you-a-wimp-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1287&preview_nonce=d47e8281df

Segment 1: Is Ron Paul An Isolationist–No–He Is For Free Trade and A Nonterventionist Foreign Policy–Are The NeoCons Warmongers–Yes–Aggressive Interventionist Foreign Policy–Empire or Nation Building!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-1-is-ron-paul-an-isolationist-no-he-is-for-free-trade-and-a-nonterventionist-foreign-policy-are-the-neocons-warmongers-yes-aggressive-interventist-fore/?preview=true&preview_id=1295&preview_nonce=17ff44ad0c

Segment 2: Cut, Cap, And Balance Pledge–The Washington D.C. Howdy Doody Debt Ceiling Show–“Say Kids What Time Is It?”–Howdy Doody Time–Fiscal Year 2020 Balanced Budget Time–Not Serious–Send In The Clowns–There Already There!– Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-2-cut-cap-and-balance-pledge-the-washington-d-c-howdy-doody-debt-ceiling-show-say-kids-what-time-is-it-howdy-doody-time-fiscal-year-2020-balance/

Pronk Pops Show 33

June 22, 2011 03:21 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 33, June 22, 2011

Segment 0: Jon Huntsman Launches 2012 Candidacy for President At Liberty Park–Should Become A Democrat Like John V. Lindsay And Run Against President Obama in 2012!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/pronk-pops-show-june-22-2011-segment-0-jon-huntsman-launches-2012-candidacy-for-president-at-liberty-park%e2%80%93should-become-a-democrat-like-john-v-lindsay-and-run-against-president-obama-in-2/

Segment 1: Republican Candidates For President Romney, Cain, and Johnson Refuse To Sign Pro-Life Citizen’s Pledge–While Sarah Palin’s Trig’s Creator E-Mail Moves Millions–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/pronk-pops-show-june-22-2011-segment-1-republican-candidates-for-president-romney-cain-and-johnson-refuse-to-sign-pro-life-citizens-pledge-while-sarah-palins-trigs-creator-e-mail-moves-mi/

Segment 2: Rick Perry/Sarah Palin Republican Establishment Candidate Ticket vs. Ron Paul/Michele Bachmann Republican Constitutional Candidate Ticket for the 2012 Presidential Race–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-2-rick-perrysarah-palin-republican-establishment-candidate-ticket-vs-ron-paulmichele-bachmann-republican-constitutional-candidate-ticket-for-the-2012-pr/

Segment 3: The Next President Of The United States Tells Truth To Power At Republican Leadership Conference–Great Speech!

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-3-the-next-president-of-the-united-states-tells-truth-to-power-at-republican-leadership-conference-great-speech/

Segment 4: Bloomberg Poll Bad News For Obama–Only 30% Certain They Will Vote For Obama in 2012!–66% Think Country On The Wrong Track!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-4-bloomberg-poll-bad-news-for-obama-only-30-certain-they-will-vote-for-obama-in-2012-66-think-country-on-the-wrong-track-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 32

June 15, 2011 03:10 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 32, June 15, 2011

Segment 0: Money, Organization, Message, Momentum, Ambition–MOMMA–You Need MOMMA To Win A Presidential Race!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-segment-0-money-organization-message-momentum-ambition-momma-you-need-momma-to-win-a-presidential-race-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1173&preview_nonce=d056ccee9f

Segment 1: Republican Presidential Debate In New Hampshire June 13, 2011–American People The Winner–Obama The Loser–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-segment-1-republican-presidential-debate-in-new-hampshire-june-13-2011%E2%80%93american-people-the-winner%E2%80%93obama-the-loser%E2%80%93videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1176&preview_nonce=0196810e90

Segment 2: The Political Issues of 2012 Elections: #1–Unemployment–Jobs, #2–Government Spending–Balanced Budgets, #3-Tax Reform–The FairTax, #4-Inflation–End The Fed, #5-Wars–Bring The Troops Home–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-
segment-2-1-the-issues-unemployment-jobs-2-government-spending-balanced-budgets-3-tax-reform-the-fairtax-4-inflation-end-the-fed-5-wars-bring-the-t/?preview=true&preview_id=1183&preview_nonce=577da72775

Segment 3: Pronk Presidential Prediction–The Winner Is?–The American People!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june15-2011-segment-3-pronk-presidential-prediction-the-winner-is-the-american-people-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1169&preview_nonce=52b4648eff

Pronk Pops Show 31

June 08, 2011 03:17 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 31: June 8, 2011

Segment 0: ENTJ–Know Thyself–This above all: to thine own self be true–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-0-entj%E2%80%93know-thyself%E2%80%93this-above-all-to-thine-own-self-be-true%E2%80%93videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1122&preview_nonce=938bb3c129

Segment 1: A Breach of Public Trust–Hound Dogs–Clinton, Weiner, and Obama–Notorious Habitual Liars–Wake Up–Start A Revolution–Ron Paul–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-1-a-breach-of-public-trust%E2%80%93hound-dogs%E2%80%93clinton-weiner-and-obama%E2%80%93notorious-habitual-liars%E2%80%93wake-up%E2%80%93start-a-revolution%E2%80%93ron-pa/

Segment 2: June 2011–Unemployment Situation Worsens–9.1% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) with 13,900,000 Unemployed and 15.8% Total Unemployment Rate (U-6) With 24,283,000 Americans Looking For Full Time Jobs!–Great Obama Depression (GOD)!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-2-june-2011-unemployment-situation-worsens-9-1-official-unemployment-rate-u-3-with-13900000-unemployed-and-15-8-total-unemployment-rate-u-6-with-24283000-america/

Pronk Pops Show 30

June 02, 2011 01:26 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show, June 2, 2011

Segment 0: The Facebook Effect–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-2-2011-segment-0-the-facebook-effect-videos/

Segment 2: Paul Allen–Idea Man: A Memoir By The Cofounder of Microsoft–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-6-2011-segment-1-paul-allen%E2%80%93idea-man-a-memoir-by-the-cofounder-of-microsoft%E2%80%93videos/

Segment 3: Last Dance For Love–Congress Blocks Debt Limit Hike–For Now–Who Is The Political Class Fooling–Bring The Troops and Jobs Home and Send The Bureaucrats and Big Spenders Home–Save Medicare and Social Security–Hot Stuff–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-2-2011-segment-3-last-dance-for-love%E2%80%93congress-blocks-debt-limit-hike%E2%80%93for-now%E2%80%93who-is-the-political-class-fooling%E2%80%93bring-the-troops-and-jobs-ho/

Pronk Pops Show 29

May 26, 2011 01:12 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 29, May 26, 2011

Segment 1: Herman Cain–The Tea Party Movement Candidate–Running On Cutting Spending, Opposing Higher Debt Ceiling, Enforcing Immigration Laws, Defunding Planned Parenthood, Nominating Pro Life Judges, And Passing The FairTax–Common Sense Solutions!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/23/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-1-herman-cain-the-tea-party-movement-candidate-running-on-cutting-spending-opposing-higher-debt-ceiling-enforcing-immigration-laws-defunding-planned-pa/?preview=true&preview_id=1018&preview_nonce=3fac63d9d6

Segment 2: Taxman Obama’s Hidden Tax Increase On The Rich That Results In Fewer Jobs And Lower Economic Growth vs. Ryan’s Long and Winding Road To Economic Stagnation vs. Senators Lee, DeMint and Paul’s Stairway To Peace and Prosperity With A Balanced Budget!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-2-taxman-obamas-hidden-tax-increase-on-the-rich-that-results-in-fewer-jobs-and-lower-economic-growth-vs-ryans-long-and-winding-road-to-economic-stagnat/

Segment 3: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Addresses Congress–A Lesson In Leadership–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-3-israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-addresses-congress-a-lesson-in-leadership-videos/

Segment 4: Memo To Washington Republican Party Establishment–You Are Not Listening To The American People–Read Our Lips–“Cut Spending and Balance The Budget Starting With Fiscal Year 2012”–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-4-memo-to-washington-republican-party-establishment-you-are-not-listening-to-the-american-people-read-our-lips-cut-spending-and-balance-the-budget-start/

Pronk Pops Show 28

May 18, 2011 04:26 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 28, May 18, 2011

Segment 1: Segment 1: Newt Gingrich Running For President As A Big Government Interventionist Republican Progressive aka Green “Compassionate” Conservative?–Favors Individual Health Care Mandates While Attacking Paul Ryan As A Right Wing Radical Social Engineer For Proposing A Premium Support or $15,000 Voucher System To Save Medicare From Bankruptcy!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-18-2011-segment-1-newt-gingrich-running-for-president-as-a-big-govenment-interventionist-republican-progressive-aka-green-compassionate-conservative-favors-individual/

Segment 2: Leave It To Beaver–Newt Gingrich–The Beaver Puppet of The Republican Washington D.C. Establishment Political Class With It Social Engineered Warfare and Welfare Economy with A $3,500 Billion Unbalanced Budget For Fiscal Year 2012 with Nearly $1,000 Billion In Deficit Spending!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-18-2011-segment-2leave-it-to-beaver-newt-gingrich-the-beaver-puppet-of-the-republican-washington-d-c-establishment-political-class-with-it-social-engineered-warfare-and-w/

Segment 3: Ron Paul Running For President Of The United States in 2012–It Is Official–The Third Time Is The Charm!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-28-2011-segment-3-ron-paul-running-for-president-of-the-united-states-in-2012-it-is-official-the-third-time-is-the-charm-videos/

Segment 4: Ron Paul Is Running For President of The United States In 2012!–The Third Time Is The Charm–A Man Of Integrity–A Candidate For Peace and Prosperity–Neither A Big Government Warfare Republican Nor A Massive Government Welfare Democrat–A Man Of And For The American People–A Tea Party Patriot–Ron Paul–Videos