2015 MIDDLE EASTERN INVASION OF EUROPE CRISIS. FLEEING THE FAILURES OF TOTALITARIANISM, BUT FAILING TO EMBRACE BETTER WAYS.

The world is a mess. Confused men — men who believe they walk with the light, but who truly walk with darkness — have made a mess of things. It's inexcusable that men in all countries look for excuses to turn their backs on others of mankind. As well, it's inexcusable for those seeking help not to reject their old ways and to adopt the ways of those from whom they seek help.



The poster child for the 2015 European Refugee Crisis is Aylan Kurdi, a boy who drown because his father decided to lead Aylan on a stupid attempt to sail to Europe in who knows what kind of boat. It's sad indeed that boy is dead. Yet, he died at the poor leadership of his father and no one else.

That said, that anyone needs a passport to travel anywhere and that anyone needs a visa to live anywhere is shameful. Of course, the need for passports and visas has arisen because of all those self-proclaimed progressives, socialists, and liberals and their system of taxation and welfare. In their self-delusion of do-gooding, their foolish and immoral system of false do-gooding has led to the need of passports and visas. Without controlled growth of their needy, their actuarial calculations would fail.

Because of the 2015 refugee crisis being peddled by news media in their quest to secure ratings and thus higher advertising sales revenues, I decided to look into the whole mess created by the greedy and fearful.

The useless bureaucrats at the United Nations have an agency that supposedly tracks refugees. However, their website to report their findings doesn't even work. I tried it with two browsers — Chrome and Edge.

So I pulled together data from Wikipedia, which reveals the power of freedom over meddlesome bureaucracies and something called the World Justice Project (WJP), which exists to advance the rule of law among the world.  Wikipedia provides refugee counts. The WJP scores countries based on how civilized are its people (ruling by law).

From the WJP, I culled the relevant subscores (see the bottom of this work) into an average score for each country, which I could use to filter the data. I defined a host country whose adjusted WJP score meets or exceeds the average for full WJP scores that are over 50. That average score is 67.

Only 15.9% of the countries recognized by the U.N. of the world adhere to what should be said as ruling by laws rather than the stupidly said "rule of law." It is these 26 countries that could host refugees, letting refugees join civilized people.

Most don't know who are refugees. The only ones who are refugees are those who can't get fair hearings in courts of their respective countries or those who face prosecution for free speech or for their religious practices. As well those who are fleeing either a civil war or a war being fought by their political leaders to which they don't approve and where the enemy is bombing them are refugees.

Everyone else is not a refugee. Being unskilled and living in a country where no jobs exist doesn't make someone a refugee. Being shunned by many because others don't like that one for whatever reason doesn't make someone a refugee. That makes them marginalized and perhaps an outcast, but not a refugee.

Many have not thought about why "refugees" become so. Refugees are fleeing the messes made by those ruling by totalitarian doctrines. Islamism or Mohammadanism, if you prefer, is a totalitarian doctrine of population control that masquerades as religious doctrine. True religious doctrines exist to help anyone gain enlightenment.

Many in the host countries don't want refugees. It should be clear to all why this is so.

It is not because refugee refuseniks lack compassion for refugees and their plight. Instead, they have seen previous refugees and other immigrants who have come to their countries fail to abandon their totalitarian ways, such as living by Mohammadanism. Worse, once being accepted, refugees and immigrants become alike to invaders who insist on the host people to change their ways.

If only refugees and immigrants would reject totalitarianism doctrines like Mohammadanism and instead embrace at least secularism, if not various doctrines of Christianity, perhaps the civilized world would become more helpful.

Here is how the supposed 16,929,321 refugees of the world could be distributed either by percent of population of hosts or percent of GDP of hosts. Likely, most who live in these countries, even the liberals, progressives and socialists would reject any call for taking in refugees by the head counts shown in the table.

Incidentally, if your country isn't listed above, likely, you are living in a country with horrible, fearful political leaders, likely who are not smart enough to lead men and women from a position of moral strength. You might not like the reality of my indictment, but nonetheless, you cannot make reality go away.

Here are the worst countries led by the worst political leaders on earth:

To select the worst countries, I took the average of the WJP scores less than or equal to 50 and selected all those countries below the average. Does it surprise you that American per capita income in True Dollars™ is as many times higher than the per capita income of those living in the worst countries?

Relevant WJP Scoring Categories

• 1.6 Transition of power is subject to the law
• 3.1 Publicized laws and government data
• 3.2 Right to information
• 3.3 Civic participation
• 4.1 Equal treatment and absence of discrimination
• 4.2 The right to life and security of the person is effectively guaranteed
• 4.3 Due process of law and rights of the accused
• 4.4 Freedom of opinion and expression is effectively guaranteed
• 4.5 Freedom of belief and religion is effectively guaranteed
• 4.6 Freedom from arbitrary interference with privacy is effectively guaranteed
• 4.7 Freedom of assembly and association is effectively guaranteed
• 8.2 Criminal adjudication system is timely and effective
• 8.4 Criminal system is impartial
• 8.5 Criminal system is free of corruption
• 8.6 Criminal system is free of improper government influence
• 8.7 Due process of law and rights of the accused
• 7.2 Civil justice is free of discrimination
• 7.3 Civil justice is free of corruption
• 7.4 Civil justice is free of improper government influence
• 7.5 Civil justice is not subject to unreasonable delay
• 7.6 Civil justice is effectively enforced

Read more ...

FOR PROFIT RETAILER CONVINCES PARENTS TO ENGAGE IN CHILD ABUSE

The execs behind for-profit T-shirt retailer FCKH8.com along with clearly ill-in-mind, complicit parents have created a videomercial exploiting their little girls. In the video (see below), the girls can be watched saying fuck enumerable times along with parroting many false beliefs about work and pay as well as rape.

In 2013, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that in 2010, about 2 females per 1,000, ages 12 and over, experienced rape — forced sexual intercourse —attempts at forced sexual intercourse and threats of forced sexual intercourse as well as sexual assault — grabbing and fondling.  The 2010 figure of 2 in 1,000, represents a whopping 64% decline from 1995.

Two raped per 1,000 comes to two-tenths of one percent (0.2%) and not 20% or the one-in-five bogus figure reported by feminists everywhere including in the crazy videomercial, which you can watch below.

Of the 2 per 1,000, 35% reported their experiences to police. About 84% of alleged victims stated police came to them after having contacted them. Police investigated 86% of reported rapes and sexual assaults and from those investigated, made arrests in 31% of the cases.

Feminism, like Islamism and Communism, is a horrible political doctrine of totalitarianism, whose cult adherents are easily indoctrinated.

Read more ...

THE BIG LIE: AMERICANS ARE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS

"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous." ~ Joseph Goebbels,  Ph.D., Reich Minister of Propaganda, NAZI Germany

The big lie told Americans at every turn is  "We are, after all, a nation of immigrants."  Vote hungry politicians tell this whopper of a lie. Unionized public educators spew this lie into the minds of impressionable, defenseless children.

Ellis Island circa early 1900s (left). Illegals storming a wall (right).

Never has America been "a nation of immigrants." Most Americans have been born here. This is true for the entire history of the USA.

During the era of British colonies, the colonies were British territories. In that era, most colonial Americans were Englishmen, overwhelmingly so. Thus, no British living in the colonies were immigrants.

On October 19, 1781, British General Charles Cornwallis formally surrendered at Yorktown, Virginia, thus bringing the War for Independence to a close. The second constitution of the USA, written in 1787, took effect in 1789. In Constitution as it is now known, authorizes a census to be taken every ten years.

Beginning with the 1850 census, census takers asked Americans where they were born, whether in the United States or elsewhere. It is from 1850 that demographers are sure these stats are accurate.




From 1770 onward immigration has been a fraction of population, never exceeding 15% in any decade and having been as low as 0.6%. From the first census authorized by the second constitution to before 1840, immigration population relative to American population never exceeded a scant 1.5%. Between 1790 and 1840, immigrant population averaged a measly 1.0% of Americans.

Between 1850 and 1930, immigrant population averaged 13.1% of Americans. Between 1940 and 1990, immigrant population averaged 6.7% of population. It's only since Billy Clinton that Americans have witnessed an uptick in immigration population relative to Americans, averaging 12% since 1990.

Over the history of the USA, American-born population has averaged 91.7%.

Someone said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." Americans are a people born right here in the US of A.

Read more ...

KILLING THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THE "WE WANT YOU TO BELIEVE CAPITAL GAINS INCOME IS DIFFERENT" TRICK

Today, I read Stop Favoring Investors, Speculators over Middle Class by noted demographer Joel Kotkin, who is one of the few eggheads whom I like.

In the article, Koktin laments about being victim of a mafia-style shakedown when it comes to paying taxes to California legislators. 

Many believe they are middle class, but they are not. In BUT WERE YOU EVER IN THE MIDDLE CLASS?, I strip out the political rhetoric to render the most meaningful definition for the phrase middle class. 

The middle class consists of those who earn at least 51% of their income from labor and who are free-and-clear title owners to an improved parcel.

Most are among the bottom class. The bottom class consists of those who earn 100% of their income from labor or who are given up to 100% of income from welfare or some combination thereof and who rent their living space. 

Few are among the top class. The top class consists of those who earn at least 51% of their income from investments and who are free-and-clear title owners to an improved parcel, which is land with a house upon it.

The elite of the top class earn 100% of their income from investments.

Kotkin is right as have been many others. The middle class shrinks ever smaller day-by-day. In PARTY OVER OOPS OUT OF TIME. YOU SHOULD HAVE PARTIED LIKE IT WAS 1999, I show that Americans enjoyed a Reagan-Clinton prosperity era but have since suffered under a Bush-Obama hard times era.

Adroitly, Kotin points out, "Most galling is that, while the middle class has endured ever-higher taxes, those who have benefited most from the Bernanke-Obama “recovery” continue to get the biggest tax breaks. This is largely the investor class, who have been able to reap the benefits of the stock-market boom..."

In PAID CORPORATE TAXES IN DEPRESSION! CORPORATE PROFITS IN A BUBBLE!, I show how corporate profits have been in a bubble since Q3 2001 while corporate taxes paid has been in a depression since Q3 2007.

Kotin goes further saying that "the rich and corporations have all sorts of ways to avoid taxation – like offshore accounts – but the real class divider is capital gains." In short, Kotin calls for an overhaul of the federal tax code to "to stop favoring investors and speculators over middle-income earners."

The current bad design of commercial life for Americans has gamed the system unfairly for those afraid of competition. Rightfully, Senators and House members of the U.S. Congress are to blame. 

After all, members of Congress are the men and women who devise all the rules under which you live.  Members of Congress establish all of the regulation to stifle competition, thus protecting some who are entrenched with power.

In IT'S ALWAYS CRONY POLITICS, CRONY GOVERNANCE AND CRONY REGULATORY CAPTURE and in THE GREEDY ARE THE ONLY PROBLEM THE WHOLE EARTH OVER, I show how Congress gets away with foisting such a bad design upon you.

Kotin proposes what I have proposed for awhile now, taxing all income the same, whether from capital gains or from selling labor. As bad and immoral as income taxation is, as long as income taxation is going to exist, then capital gains should be taxed at the same rate as ordinary wages and salaries precisely because all income is the same.

All income is the same. Claiming there are different kinds of income and then trying to justify one's false beliefs around such is neither scientific nor accurate.

As I explain in REAPING DAY APPROACHES. THE REAPER COMES TO REAP YOU. ANOTHER TAX DAY IN AMERICA COMES, wage earners get shafted because they lack deduction on their capital. Wage earners cannot write off legitimate expenses such as food, which is energy for the mind and for the body; clothing and rent, which are shelters for the body and mind; transport, which is how wage earners bring to market (their workplaces) their wealth for sale (their work); medicine, which is how wage earners restore damaged bodies and minds; fitness, which is how wage earners educate their bodies; and skills acquisition, which is how wage earners educate their bodies and minds.

All taxpayers, who cannot shift their otherwise compulsory tax burdens upon others, subsidize the capital of incorporated firms since the rules of law let enterprise-adventurers write off capital, sometimes as direct expenses and sometimes as depreciation expenses. In short, for incorporated firms, any profits earned get earned on eventually free-to-them capital.

Any trade is merely a purchase and sale for cash or credit, which can be settled by cash. In WHY IS THE ECONOMY SO HORRIBLE? BECAUSE ACADEMIA ECONOMICS IS FAKE, I show the entirety of trade, or commerce, or real economics ties up with two words — property and profit. 

Without profit from effort, anyone would lack buying power to buy anything else. Without property, no one can trade. At less than break even, anyone would stop trying to produce property. No one works at a loss.

Labor is the poor man's capital. Capital and labor are not distinct, separate producing agents. 

The wage worker buys living space, food and transport. Those are his as capital needed produce his labor. From his labor, he expresses his skills through time, which all call work. His work is his wealth.

He trades his wealth in a purchase and sale for wages with his employer. Wages are the wealth  his employer trades away.

His wages less his expenses to live become his profit.

The investor or capitalist sells credit or cash and buys a future contract for profit. The entrepreneur-adventurer or borrower sells forward a profit share and buys credit or cash. 

The profit share gets calculated as a multiple of the sum lent or paid. What gets called interest is merely part of the profit share paid out in parts as insurance against loss.

In INTEREST, CAPITALISTS AND FUTURISTIC TIME COPS, I reveal why interest as a kind of income exists.

Let's face it. The American dream, truly which means entering into the middle class, owning a house free-and-clear, has been foreclosed upon for many.

Read more ...

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DECREES ITSELF AS MASTER PIMP FOR ALL SEX WORKERS IN EUROPE

On Wednesday, February 26, the European parliament voted for resolution to criminalize the purchase of sex but not the sale of sex. In Europe, this is the known as the Nordic model of prostitution. The resolution passed by almost a 2.5 to 1 margin (343 for, 139 against, 105 abstained). You can read all about the silliness in the U.K.'s Guardian.

Mary Honeyball a spokesman for the labor party of the EU parliament called the continuance of prostitution "exploitation of women," the new measure a "nuanced approach" to tackle prostitution by purportedly "punishing men who treat women's bodies as a commodity" and doing all this without punishing women "who are driven into sex work."

By fining men while letting women work as paid whores, the irony here is that government has become the pimp, the pimp who wants his girls working and who wants to collect fees from customers called fines.


Women aren't driven into sex work. Prostitutes like the work. It's fast, easy, and has a high-pay to low-skill ratio. 

Worse, these silly European parliamentarians suffer from the false belief that bodies are being traded as commodities. Bodies aren't being traded as commodities, pleasure is. For a people who earn their living trading votes for favors, one would think parliamentarians would fully understand prostitution and how it works.

What is the real problem? Government, the created creature has grown beyond society, the creator. This is the true evil.

When a people live under a law for everything, that living is called totalitarianism. That is what totalitarianism means. It doesn't mean communism or socialism, though those kinds of collectivism tend to lead to totalitarianism. 

For people to be free, there must be freedom, or those realms for individuals where there is no officialdom. Said another way, there must be liberty, or where the law (government) is content to leave all alone and thus not create duties and rights.

Government should be tiny, hardly noticeable in the lives of the people. Instead, the lives of the people are tiny and government is all pervasive. 

People get what they deserve. This is what people deserve for wanting government to provide income-giving welfare instead of merely protection of any individual and his property (ownership in stuff) from foreign mobs and domestic ones.

The right act of course, is to de-criminalize prostitution and restore it to its rightful place, liberty, or that arena where The Law is content to leave individuals alone.

Of course, the real reason for regulation and condemnation of anything is revenue for over-sized salaries and pensions for bureaucrats and politicians. If they fine prostitutes, they look evil. There aren't that many working whores so the total take is small. 

However, if they fine the johns, revenues shall increase. There are tens of thousands of potential fine-paying johns. 

By claiming to stamp out yet another evil, politicians can pander to feminist sympathizers as well as religionists. And this is the driver for the latest trend sweeping Europe.

If you want to better understand prostitution from the minds of prostitutes, read The Honest Courtesan. This woman, a former prostitute, blogs about prostitution.

Of course, web cam workers who masturbate on cam engage in a kind of prostitution, trading pleasure for bank credit convertible into cash. So too, porno video sex workers engage in prostitution, working with other prostitutes and having their work recorded to video, also trading pleasure for bank credit convertible into cash. 

The advance of government toward totalitarianism never leads to progress. True progress arises from autonomy, or that which is self-rule.

Read more ...

STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES AND THE STUPIDITY OF THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY

Most Americans favor living by liberty over totalitarianism. Most Americans want to live within their own sphere of activity in which the law is content to leave them alone. Most Americans would much rather live this way than live by having government in every aspect of their lives, which we know as totalitarianism. 

The Libertarian Party is a tiny political party in the USA having been around for decades. The members of this party claim to be for liberty rather than totalitarianism. To most Americans that should sound pretty good since the Democrats and the Republicans seem to pass ever more laws, which looks ever more like American-branded totalitarianism. 

Yet it is little wonder why most Americans ignore the Libertarian Party? Big "L" LPers seem quite confused about liberty — the absence of law in the presence of government — and right — diminished liberty of others on one's behalf. 

Libertarians pride themselves on what they call the non-aggression principle (the NAP) though some call it the zero aggression principle (the ZAP). To them, the initiation of force against persons or property is illegitimate. Who could disagree?

A review of official Libertarian Party platform reveals a muddled mess and incoherency. Early on in the platform one can read this bit of Libertarian Party comedy  gold:

We believe ... that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships...

How do they propose to banish? Banishing requires force, that which is against the NAP / ZAP! To banish means to proclaim as outlaw, to forbid. It's late 1300s Old French into English.

What good anyone can find in the Libertarian Party platform is merely a re-wording of the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution, but a re-wording that lacks clarity. A deeper reading of the platform reveals troubling Libertarian Party thought.

Under the heading titled 3.5 Rights and Discrimination, the Libertarian Party reveals contradiction. In the second sentence, the party platform is:

"We reject the idea that a natural right can ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that "right.""

which follows the first sentence: 

"Libertarians embrace the concept that all people are born with certain inherent rights."

There can be no right without duty. That is the reality of more than 799 years of Anglo-Norman and American jurisprudence. 

Obligation means duty. One must fulfill duty by either doing X or not doing X so that another can exercise one's right. That is jurisprudence.

The right to life is a natural right. The right to life imposes the duty on everyone else to not violate that right of anyone. The natural right to one's life imposes a duty upon all others to not murder.

Doing one's duty of not violating another's right fulfills one's duty. One can only enjoy the right of living, of not being murdered if everyone does his or her duty, fulfills his or her duty of not killing. 

If a right is inherent, it is natural. That which is natural is by birth. That which is inherent is closely connected as with those qualities arising from being born and alive.

Claiming that a natural right cannot ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that right and then claiming that people have inherent (natural) rights is contradiction. There can not be right without duty. It's impossibility.

If one supports the LP belief that a natural right cannot ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that right, then one must support the the idea of murdering anyone on a whim for any reason, any time in the absence of government and criminal law. From the LPs own manifesto, they reject natural rights because they reject natural duties.


If one supports 3.5 of the LP manifesto, that no one has duty to fulfill the natural right of another, then one supports anarchy. In anarchy, no one has duty not to kill another. Thus, no one has a natural right to life. Only under anarchy, does anyone not have any rights as no one has duties. 

Before there is government, there is society and before society, only individuals. If there were but one individual on earth, that one would be free to go and roam wherever, live wherever, eat whatever. He would be free even to kill himself. He would be right to do all of those acts.

Anyone can conceive of there being the best land on earth, the most productive, yielding the best food and the best climate.

As soon as two exist, there can be contention for that best land. As both have equal rights in themselves as described in the foregoing, both can not occupy the same land at the same time and derive the same benefit. 

One fix for this is for one to murder the other. As both have the right to live, with the advent of both, both have the duty to not murder the other. So while murder would solve one guy's problem, he could not do so without failing in his duty while at the same time violating the right of another in an egregious manner.

The only failing of this, of course, is that if only two existed, there would be no one left to punish the murderer, in any manner including banishment (ostracism) from those in society of property.

So rather than resort to murder, they could agree that one would take the next best land and the one taking the best land would compensate the one taking the second best.

Now we can see this scenario happening as more individuals arise on the earth. As each cannot occupy the same land at the same time and derive the same benefit, each succeeding one could agree with all others occupying better land to be compensated. The alternative is murder and the more who exist, the greater the scale of that murder.

However, if one murders another with better land, rejecting compensation, the rest who are in this society of property, where property means right of ownership and never the thing owned, could impose upon the one disrupting harmony, banishment at minimum or death at maximum.

It seems that some libertarians reject the belief that fulfilling duty means not doing an act as well as doing an act. One can fulfill a duty by not doing X.

You have a duty to not trespass on my land. You fulfill that duty every day you refrain from trespassing. You have a duty to not steal the fruit growing upon my trees. You fulfill that duty every day you refrain from stealing my fruit.

I have the right to have my land free from trespassers. I have the right to have my fruit not stolen by others.

My property, that is my right of ownership in my land and my fruit, makes it so, whether I live with others in society of property under customary law or in conjunction with others in society, also with government, which establishes civil law and criminal law.

Civil law requires court in administration of justice. It is a creature of legislators. Customary law, or law of society, that which proceeds government is a creature of agreed upon custom of persons. Where there is law, whether civil law or customary law, and where there are rights, there must be duties.

It's impossible to support natural rights and then reject natural duties. To do so is to be muddled in mind, to live illogically, to live absurdly.

LPers are free to reject reality and jurisprudence. Who should stop them? Who should violate their NAP/ZAP? 

It's no wonder why they can't make headway in America. Stupid is as stupid does or so said Forrest Gump. 

Read more ...

YOU LIVE AT THE MERCY OF A CLOWN-CAR DRIVEN BY MEN AND WOMEN OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE

"What’s keeping people from buying houses is the fact that other people aren’t buying houses. If there were some sense that a bottom was forming in the market or in house prices, we probably could actually see a pretty quick snap-back, an increase in housing demand, and that in turn would feed back into the credit markets, I think, in a very beneficial way. So there’s the possibility that, if the housing market can get restarted, we could get a relatively benign outcome." ~ Ben Bernanke, then Chairman of the Federal Reserve and Economics Ph.D., MIT, from the January 29–30, 2008, Meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee of the Federal Reserve

Today, the Federal Reserve System, the privately-owned, monopoly bankers' bank established by Congress and President Wilson in 1913, released documents from the 2008 Banking Crisis, which key executives revealed their beliefs about banking, credit and trade. The quote of Bernanke above is one of the many silly-minded beliefs expressed by a handful of men and women who lord over the lives of all Americans because they control the Federal Reserve and thus all of banking and credit for Americans.

Too bad Ben Bernanke has no idea about what keeps people from buying houses. Too bad for us, a Congress and President Wilson back in 1913 decided that a central bank monopoly should be created to govern over all of banking, naming it the Federal Reserve, and entrusting guys like Ben Bernanke to run it.

Bernanke seems to believe that Americans are mindless lemmings who buy houses on whims merely because they see others buying houses on whims.

There is one great axiom that governs all of trade, the Axiom of Profit. The Axiom of Profit holds the sum of sales must at least equal the outlays for production otherwise, the producer goes to ruin. And for wage earners, the Axiom of Profit is alike — the sum of wages (income) must at least equal the outlays for living, otherwise the wage earner goes bankrupt.

Almost all persons rely on obtaining mortgages for buying houses. When prices for houses rise too high, and when the sum of wages fails to equal outlays for taxes, gasoline, heat, food and the like, the wage earner lives at a loss and thus falls to ruin. 

What kept people from buying houses past the peak of the realty bubble is that all those could buy on the way up, already bought. There were no other Americans willing to buy. Everyone else, even if they had profit from the sum of wages exceeding their outlays for living, were unwilling to pay prices for houses and take on debt service. Mostly though, almost all of those who didn't buy couldn't buy at the offer prices and still break even.

What a Residential Realty Bubble Looks Like

Even those who had bought began to live at losses when prices for gasoline rose high enough to push them into the red. Once the avalanche of collapse began, many mortgage-serving wage earners lost their jobs and thus their wages. Widespread collapse of the general economy followed.

As I explained in WHY IS THE ECONOMY SO HORRIBLE? BECAUSE ACADEMIA ECONOMICS IS FAKE, profits and prices are the key indicators, which give signals for trade among a people. The Law of Prices and the Axiom of Profit reveal the true governing forces irrespective of markets-meddling political action. 

The key factors that must be watched are bank deposits and profits. Any banker worth her salt, will tell you bank deposits aries from discounting and re-discounting commercial paper, from loans and from profits. Deposits represent buying power and lead to rising prices when deposits outstrip property production. Rising prices crimp profits, eventually causing losses for many, leading to collapse.

No where in the discourse among powerful Federal Reserve executives can anyone find discussion about deposits, deposit growth, profits, falling profits, losses and prices. No where did these men and women with their fancy academia credentials discuss the crucial relationship between deposits growth and profit or loss growth for what was a $14.8 trillion system of trade, 95% of which was based on credit.

The Federal Reserve needs to be stripped of its power in setting interest rates. It doesn't matter who sits as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. A handful of men and women lack omniscience and without doubt are not smart enough to know what should be the interbank lending rate and what should be lending and borrowing rates for commerce. 

As I explained in WHY FUTURES MARKETS SHOULD SET THE FEDS FUNDS RATE RATHER THAN THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD OF GOVERNORS that through the brilliance of a futures market, Americans could safeguard their livelihoods for all time returning to freedom, returning to living among a people who get rich from earnest effort rather than political connection.

For his adult life, prior to getting the appointment at the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke worked as a school teacher, spreading the mythology of economics to young minds. Bernanke never worked in banking nor held any job related to credit, the chief material of buying and selling, the whole of trade, or what many call "the economy".

Read more ...

WALK LEFT SIDE, SAFE. WALK RIGHT SIDE, SAFE. WALK MIDDLE, SOONER OR LATER GET SQUISH JUST LIKE GRAPE.

This meme so true! Of course the real political spectrum of actual governments the earth over goes like this:

Communism ↔ Socialism ↔ Syndicalism ↔ Oligopolism ↔ Fascism

Bureaucrats dominate with socialism. The troika of bureaucrats, unionists and oligopolists try to co-exist with syndicalism and oligopolists dominate with oligopolism.

Militarism is present always along the spectrum. Unchecked totalitarianism pushes toward the extreme and fosters a rise in militarism at those extremes.

The military dominates the extremes of communism and fascism, partnering with bureaucrats under communism and oligopolists under fascism to maintain control against the people.

Fascists amount to military oligopolists. Communists amount to military socialists. That is what distinguishes fascists on the right and communists on the left, at the ends.

Most politics in most countries ends up being a tug-of-war between the middle three. That is why governments never stop growing. Like bad layers of paint covering over beautifully designed wood, laws accumulate from each preceding group.

In the USA, the backbone of the political spectrum is corporatism, which means living by organizing into groups on the basis of allied interests and seeking codified (legalized) status and privilege for being a member of that group. Most often organization arises around these: academic, agricultural, industrial, ethnic, labor and military.

Under corporatism, you, the individual do not count. You get forced to join a group. Otherwise, you don't get any privileges such as welfare or subsidies.

So it is funny in an odd way when lefties accuse libertarians of being on the right and when oligopolists accuse anarchists of being on the left. Libertarianism and Anarchism are not even of even on this spectrum!

Except for all the greedy who want to gain living standard without earning it by seeking welfare and subsidies from politicians they favor, the rest of us want to be free.

Nothing shall change until you decide to jump from the spectrum and embrace this as you mantra:

Minimal government. Maximal respect.

Those who approve of force to spur on involuntary action lack good arguments. All the left vs right bickering is bickering over whose brand of theft mollifies the masses better.

"Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later get squish just like grape. Here, karate, same thing. Either you karate do 'yes' or karate do 'no.' You karate do 'guess so.'" ~ Miyagi in the Karate Kid

Read more ...