Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Good morning. In case any one is interested...

 

"Thomas Jefferson lives, he's Ron Paul..."

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7X8WJdlq1k

 

 

As US Debt To GDP Passes 101%, The Global Debt Ponzi Enters Its Final Stages

 

Today, without much fanfare, US debt to GDP hit 101% with the latest issuance of $32 billion in 2 Year Bonds. If the moment when this ratio went from double to triple digits is still fresh in readers minds, is because it is: total debt hit and surpassed the most recently revised Q4 GDP on January 30, or just three weeks ago. Said otherwise, it has taken the US 21 days to add a full percentage point to this most critical of debt sustainability ratios: but fear not, with just under $1 trillion in new debt issuance on deck in the next 9 months, we will be at 110% in no time.

 

Read more:

http://www.zerohedge...ts-final-stages

 

 

Is The Federal Reserve Doing A Good Job?

 

So has the Federal Reserve done a good job?

Well, one of the things that the Federal Reserve is charged with doing is to protect the value of our currency. In other words, they are supposed to keep inflation under control.

In that regard, the Federal Reserve has failed miserably. The U.S. dollar has lost 96.2 percent of its value since 1900, and almost 100 percent of that decline has come during the Federal Reserve era.

The other half of the Federal Reserve's "dual mandate" is to keep unemployment low.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the Fed has failed there too.

In the United States today, there are less jobs than there were a decade ago even though we have added more than 30 million more people to the population since then.

The average duration of unemployment in the U.S. is about 40 weeks, and if you gathered together all of the unemployed people in America in one place, they would constitute the 68th largest country in the world.

So, no, the Federal Reserve is not doing a good job of keeping us all employed.

We are also told that the era before the Federal Reserve was created was a time when great "financial panics" happened on a regular basis and that the Federal Reserve was created to stop them from happening.

So has the Federal Reserve been effective at preventing financial panics?

Well, current Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has openly admitted that the Federal Reserve helped cause the Great Depression of the 1930s.

And there have been 10 separate economic recessions since 1950.

So that is not a really great track record.

In addition, it seems very clear that the foolish low interest rate policies of the Fed fueled the massive housing bubble that plunged the U.S. economy into the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression when it finally crashed.

Shouldn't the Federal Reserve receive some criticism for that?

Of course one of the biggest problems with the Federal Reserve is that it is a perpetual debt machine.

If you do now know where our money comes from in the United States, please see this article. The Federal Reserve system was designed to perpetually expand the money supply and to perpetually expand U.S. government debt.

On both counts, it has performed brilliantly.

When the Federal Reserve was created, the U.S. national debt was less than 3 billion dollars.

Today, it is more than 5000 times larger.

What is the appropriate word to use when something is 5000 times worse than it used to be?

When you simply look at performance, the truth is that it is really hard to deny that the Federal Reserve has been a complete and total nightmare for the United States.

But instead of shutting it down, Congress has been giving the Federal Reserve even more power. The Dodd-Frank bill gave the Fed significant new powers and substantial new responsibilities, and the Fed has been exercising those new powers in almost complete secrecy.

 

Link:

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/is-the-federal-reserve-doing-a-good-job

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am happy that I spend my time differently than some people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're getting spammy, Sparky. At the end of the day he can't get elected, and I'm mostly happy about it. No matter what a dude tells me on what they think about a woman's right to choose- it's not going to change my mind. I can easily break ranks with Paul there, and posting videos about his perspective on the issue isn't going to change mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The primary functions of the Department of Education are to "establish policy for, administer and coordinate most federal assistance to education, collect data on US schools, and to enforce federal educational laws regarding privacy and civil rights." The Department of Education does not establish schools or colleges.

 

The Office of the Inspector General has a unit of enforcement agents who conduct investigations and raids in connection to student loan defaults and fraud.

 

Unlike the systems of most other countries, education in the United States is highly decentralized, and the federal government and Department of Education are not heavily involved in determining curricula or educational standards (with the recent exception of the No Child Left Behind Act). This has been left to state and local school districts. The quality of educational institutions and their degrees is maintained through an informal private process known as accreditation, over which the Department of Education has no direct public jurisdictional control.

 

The Department's mission is: to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. Aligned with this mission of ensuring equal access to education, the Department of Education is a member of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, and works with federal partners to ensure proper education for homeless and runaway youth in the United States.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To say education is highly decentralized is an understatement. It needs to be pointed out that NCLB was intitiated by George W Bush, but aided and abetted by the Democrats.

 

Federal aid to education mostly helps low income students and low income districts, but just about everyone gets something. Some districts would be hurting without this money and many students would not get services for special needs without it.

 

I think Sparky is angling for the VP slot on the Ron Paul ticket. Good luck with that.

 

LouieB

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think what's really happened is it's harder than he thought to bring all that change that was promised and spoken of so eloquently. Hope is not enough.

 

I think that is partly true, but nobody made him appoint the same Goldman Sachs toadies, Rahm Emmanual, etc... The game is so rigged and they like it that way, it's profitible and keeps them in office. I was an Obama delegate and a huge believer but as usual, I'm disillusioned and now realize nothing is going to change. To Iremberdboon's point, there are some social issue gains that make Obama a better choice than any republican pinhead but as far as the economy goes, not sure it matters who is in office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Debt as Obama entered office...10.6 trillion

 

Debt this morning...15.387 trillion

 

$48,000 a second...

 

Estimated debt by end of first term...16.2 trillion

 

If my math is correct that is an increase of 65% in four years...

 

Estimated debt in ten years based on Obama's recent budget proposals....26 trillion

 

Isn't that over 150%? I don't have the math gene...

 

Something to brag about I guess...

 

Where is the U.S. headed if Pres. Obama is adding an estimated $5 trillion to the national debt in his first term?

 

If you add in the $1 trillion-plus deficits he has run for his first three years in office, along with an estimated $200 billion in economic stimulus, that's about $5 trillion in the red in his first term.

 

George W. Bush set the previous record of $3.4 trillion of deficits in eight years. President Obama is on track to add $5 trillion in deficits in just four years. This is part of the reason why our national debt is now a whopping $15 trillion.

 

The Weekly Standard crunches the numbers to find that deficit spending just under President Obama equals more than $17,000 per person or about $70,000 for a family of four.

 

Link:

http://caffertyfile....his-first-term/

 

obama-deficit-2011.jpg

 

I guess you would call Nader a Progressive. He doesn't sound too happy with someone...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWupFxpU1yQ&feature=related

Link to post
Share on other sites

ugh. im done. go vote for santorum sparky.

 

again nothing is worse than the hipster "they are all crooked" line. at least jeff tweedy is willing to go to work for my party and that makes me proud.

 

anyone who says they are alike and can tell me pelosi reid and carville clinton and obama are just the same as gingrich bush cheney and palin must have fell off the turnip truck

Link to post
Share on other sites

ugh. im done. go vote for santorum sparky.

 

again nothing is worse than the hipster "they are all crooked" line. at least jeff tweedy is willing to go to work for my party and that makes me proud.

 

anyone who says they are alike and can tell me pelosi reid and carville clinton and obama are just the same as gingrich bush cheney and palin must have fell off the turnip truck

Sparky has made it pretty clear that Ron Paul is his man. Or maybe there isn't a candidate he can really support. I don't kinow. I am ready to vote Santorum just to keep him around a few more months to spice shit up What a dick!!

 

While all politicians have similar traits (all tow the same basic party line, all continue some of the policies from their predicessors) only the blind and the lame could think that Obama and Bush are the same. Most of us who support him wish that Obama had stepped further left, but considering the stuff that is being said about him, who can blame him for trying to meet everyone's needs at some level. It is easy for Ralph Nader, the man resposnible for getting George W. Bush elected to bad rap Obama, the guy has never been elected to anything. It is another thing to have to actually win elections in a large diverse country like this and try and govern under these circumstances. No one who gets elected is going to meet everyone's needs, nor are they going to meet all the needs of a particular constituancy. So it goes.

 

LouieB

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing you all seem to be losing sight of is that at the end of the day, these candidates are looking to do what they think is the best thing for the country.

 

Disagree with them, but save the hatred for sports and music.There is a big difference between being wrong and being evil.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...