There has to be a total financial crash to justify things and to start over fresh.

[BrentCrude]

With gambling there sure are alot of terms dealing with fish.You have sharks,whales ''not really a fish''fish themselves and low rollers I like to call minnows.I talked about the minnows in one of my current posts that's still posted.The minnows most of the time fall into the bottom feeder category where what ever low rated book bonus or freebie filters down to the muck on the bottom of the ocean that no other fish on top wants ,they gladly gobble it up.

Nowadays you hear people say things like,he's going out with a skank,he drinks rot gut liquor,eats filler food like mac and cheese and tube steak.Then you turn on HRTV or TVG to watch horse racing and all the hosts from Saratoga-Belmont& Santa Anita-Del Mar talk about the big tracks and their cheap claimers being 75 grand claimers that are embarrassing and ready for the glue factory when in fact,at 60 tracks in the middle of the countrythat they never talk about,the stakes race horses aren't worth 75K.

Then you turn Jim Cramer on CNBC and he's touting large block purchases of $80 a share stock to trust fund kids that call in that sound younger than your paper boy.If anyone ever called in to say that they wanted to buy a couple hundred dollars worth of some penny stock,Cramer would yell at them like the caller is the kid in the Christmas Story wanting a BB Gun saying he will shoot his eye out if he buys that penny stock.

Is it my imagination or are there 2 different dimensions in this country where more than ever I think some kind of excessive roaring 20's false exuberance is taking place where a good share of people are living in fantasy land and a depression will be a come uppance to them all?You see day after day of celebrity Paris Hilton BS tv programming where no one can explain what anyone actually does and how they acquire mega buck fortunes.

A guy that's a mega hedge fund trader that went to college at Harvard named Philip Falcone is about my age who grew up close to where I lived all my life.The next town over in fact,a couple miles away.The former CEO of Pepsico grew up there,his brother who's a company CEO as well as the Doc Graham character in Field of dreams,Bob Dylan,Roger Maras,Jeno Palluci the frozen food king,Kevin ** Hale,Bugliosa the OJ prosecutor and Gary Pucket from the band the Union Gap.It's a real ethnic democrat-socialist stronghold where you have alot of nepetism and a good old boys club involved in government.On Rush's show yesterday they were pounding on Congressman Jim Oberstar from the same town that's running roughshad on the FAA and everything else he gets his filthy hands on. Falcone is brilliant and is worth a billion or more bucks but he just played crooked distressed junk bond,government bailout bonding crap games for 20 years to make him his billion.Now he bought the Minnesota Wild hockey team yesterday and the only reason there is a Minnesota Wild is that the city of St.Paul and state subsidised the team and arena with tax dollars.Here's a guy that made a billion bucks that wants welfare to support his hobbie of owning a pro sports franchise.

Am I the only one to shake my head each and every day thinking to myself that we don't have a real free market and capitalism in this country?It truly is a luck of the draw country as to who ends up on the right side of the coin in my humble opinion.

Come on depression!Maybe after a depression things can start over fresh again or at least it will knock the beejesus out of all the fakes and frauds that made phoney$$$$$$$

[HedgeHog]

Come on depression? Careful what you wish for. This recession we're in (are we all agreed it's a recession now?) is bad enough. People walking away from their homes, prices rising sharply, the free-falling dollar, job losses, etc... point to very tough times ahead. So bad that the next debate we'll be having is are we in a depression? It'll be an interesting topic for discussion at the local "soup kitchen".

[OLGC_Slayer]

The Federal Reserve Scam has to end at some point.

[TexansFan]

Nobody obviously wants a depression. There are some positive things that can come out of all this though. Americans have gotten so used to living for the almighty dollar nowadays. They have to have a big house, a new car every two years, eat out 6 times a week, have all the latest gadgets, and so forth.

Maybe people will learn that you don't really need all that stuff to live and be happy.

[OLGC_Slayer]

Anytime the economy crashes, its not the rich who suffer. They love economic crashes, because they can buy more properties, more businesses, etc.
In fact, one could argue that its the rich (starting with the Federal Reserve Board) who engineer the crashes in the first place.

[TexansFan]

The buyout at Bear Stearns was a travesty. Put them people in jail.

[Bluehorseshoe]

Anytime the economy crashes, its not the rich who suffer. They love economic crashes, because they can buy more properties, more businesses, etc.
In fact, one could argue that its the rich (starting with the Federal Reserve Board) who engineer the crashes in the first place.

Let me guess....


You watched "Zeitgeist".

[OLGC_Slayer]

Let me guess....


You watched "Zeitgeist".

I have no idea what your talking about. You tell me how Central Banking is NOT a pyramid scheme and maybe I will listen.

[OLGC_Slayer]

The buyout at Bear Stearns was a travesty. Put them people in jail.

The people who are advocating these bailouts are the same people who whine about welfare and government handouts to poor people. Hypocrisy at its finest.

[Bluehorseshoe]

I have no idea what your talking about. You tell me how Central Banking is NOT a pyramid scheme and maybe I will listen.

I agree it is. I'm just saying that film (which is on the web and many people have seen.) talks about it in detail.

[OLGC_Slayer]

I agree it is. I'm just saying that film (which is on the web and many people have seen.) talks about it in detail.

Oh sorry dude. I'm a little sensitive about this issue and have studied it in depth and a student of history.
Central Banking is the scam of the last 200 years. When Wilson was cajoled into creating the Federal Reserve in 1912 America as it was known ceased to exist.
Jefferson and Jackson both warned against Central Banking, the story of Jackson fighting the bankers in the 1830's is quite interesting.
It is a tool of the wealthy and elite used to control the middle class. I know that sounds like a "crazy conspiracy theory" but it isn't. It's the economic reality of having a small group of men control the flow of money and interest in an effort to manipulate natural economic cycles.

[mathdotcom]

The Fed overstepped its boundaries, and the Bear bailout was a huge blunder. However, you need someone to decide how much money needs to be printed. That is essentially what they do, though not w/ paper currency explicitly. Central banks are an important and necessary institution, and though they do control a large segment of the economy, it is not just to protect the interests of rich shareholders.

If they want to create recessions so the rich can buy everything up cheaply, why have they prevented so many recessions in the past? Even if a recession may make property cheaper, recessions hurt those same wealthy who have a lot of their wealth denominated in equities.

[frankiecheese]

Agreed

Anytime the economy crashes, its not the rich who suffer. They love economic crashes, because they can buy more properties, more businesses, etc.
In fact, one could argue that its the rich (starting with the Federal Reserve Board) who engineer the crashes in the first place.

The little guy always suffers.

[OLGC_Slayer]

The Fed overstepped its boundaries, and the Bear bailout was a huge blunder. However, you need someone to decide how much money needs to be printed. That is essentially what they do, though not w/ paper currency explicitly. Central banks are an important and necessary institution, and though they do control a large segment of the economy, it is not just to protect the interests of rich shareholders.

If they want to create recessions so the rich can buy everything up cheaply, why have they prevented so many recessions in the past? Even if a recession may make property cheaper, recessions hurt those same wealthy who have a lot of their wealth denominated in equities.

To answer you're second question, the creation I am talking about is flooding the market with cheap money to purposefully create inflation and currency devaluation. Why else would the Fed do that if all the greenbacks weren't owned by China and other foreigners, and the Federal Government spending money like a sailor on a drunken shore leave?
To address your first comment, if the central bank stops interfering with the economy by manipulation to suit their interests, the natural economic cycle will dictate money supply.
What the Federal Reserve and the central bankers are doing is the opposite.

[TexansFan]

China could really hurt us, badly.

[mathdotcom]

Why does increasing the money supply benefit the rich? Most increases in the money supply occur through the issuance of debt.

Same question for currency devaluation. Why do the rich benefit from this? Okay, more people want your exports. Why doesn't this benefit average Joe working in a factory that produces exports? Why has the American dollar been so strong until recently? Why not devalue it sooner?

The central bank exists to minimize the fluctuations in the business cycle. Minimizing fluctuations is in the interests of all people. Recessions become milder, rather than quick (and costly) plummets into poverty where, according to your theory, the rich would be even more able to buy up cheap assets.

[OLGC_Slayer]

Why does increasing the money supply benefit the rich? Most increases in the money supply occur through the issuance of debt.

Same question for currency devaluation. Why do the rich benefit from this? Okay, more people want your exports. Why doesn't this benefit average Joe working in a factory that produces exports? Why has the American dollar been so strong until recently? Why not devalue it sooner?

The central bank exists to minimize the fluctuations in the business cycle. Minimizing fluctuations is in the interests of all people. Recessions become milder, rather than quick (and costly) plummets into poverty where, according to your theory, the rich would be even more able to buy up cheap assets.

The rich benefit from devaluation because they have more assets. Devalution only reduces their ability to buy more assets cheaply but that is mollified by deflation. Obviously if the demand for non essential assets reduces, the price reduces as well.
The Central Bank, addressing your second, creates the fluctuations that create the depressions in the first place. There were no such thing as "economic crashes" before Central Banking. The Federal Reserve does many things that make no sense to economists, as such they are creating unnatural manipulations which in turn can dictate the flow of the market. There were economic downturns caused by natural cyclical economics and food production, war, etc, but they were not usually breaking the backs of the middle class.

[mathdotcom]

The rich benefit from devaluation because they have more assets...? So that means anyone with assets benefits, just maybe not as much. I don't see how the amount of your assets changes whether or not you gain or lose from devaluation. You must be assuming these assets are denominated in foreign currency. You didn't answer my question about why the U.S. dollar has been strong the past 20 years.

Your comments about the central bank creating recessions are way off. There were no economic crashes before central banking because economies were isolated and less subject to shocks. There was also no real stock market. Indeed, poor central banking practices in the late 20s really made things worse. But that was because they DECREASED the money supply, not increased it. They learned from that, and that's why there has not been a depression as severe since, and probably never will be.

There is disagreement about how the central bank should operate, but there is no debate over whether or not one should exist. There are hundreds of economics textbooks on monetary policy.

[mathdotcom]

Economic growth comes primarily from investment, which is sensitive to the interest rate. Fluctuations are minimized by decreasing interest rates during recessions, and theoretically vice-versa during booms. The problem is identifying when you are in a recession, and how much to change interest rates. That's where economists disagree.

[JC]

The super rich benefit because many of them have a direct stake in the banking system. Lower rates means more loans and more fees.

Plus if they own hard assets, oil, food, metals, etc, lowering the rates and increasing the money supply increases their values.

Every time the Fed cuts rates, it weakens the dollar, and drives up the price of oil which is denominated in dollars. They are doing it to prop the stock market. They should let the market trade and wash out.

When they increase the supply of money, it weakens whatever dollars you are holding or are about to be paid in. Inflation taxes everyone holding dollars equally. When they cut the rates, the hourly labor wager don't automatically go up so those people are hurt.

Fractional reserve banking if practiced by any entity other than the sacred banks would be deemed a scam by the government.

[willyback]

Play it safe: central banks are quietly liquidating their dollar reserves, oil producing countries are calling for a new reserve currency, and China's on the rise (out producing just about everybody). Get your assets out of the US dollar (hedge with gold and silver). Buy some Chinese Yuan while the price is still artificially weak against the dollar. Whatever you do, stay away from wall street.

[mathdotcom]

The super rich benefit because many of them have a direct stake in the banking system. Lower rates means more loans and more fees.

Plus if they own hard assets, oil, food, metals, etc, lowering the rates and increasing the money supply increases their values.

Every time the Fed cuts rates, it weakens the dollar, and drives up the price of oil which is denominated in dollars. They are doing it to prop the stock market. They should let the market trade and wash out.

When they increase the supply of money, it weakens whatever dollars you are holding or are about to be paid in. Inflation taxes everyone holding dollars equally. When they cut the rates, the hourly labor wager don't automatically go up so those people are hurt.

Fractional reserve banking if practiced by any entity other than the sacred banks would be deemed a scam by the government.

Claim 1: Lower rates means more loans and more fees.
Who benefits from the low-interest loans? Who are the people that need loans the most? That's right, JJ does. But so do the poor. The Fed is not just cutting rates forever. Think about the past when they raised rates. Did anyone accuse them of favoring the poor then?

Claim 2: If you own hard assets, increasing the money supply benefits you. Okay, if you sell these hard assets, you get a higher price for them than before, but the extra money you get for them is worth less. If prices for everything double, and you get twice the price for your hard assets, you are not any better off.

Claim 3: They are lowering rates to increase the price of oil. This benefits oil companies and shareholders, but it hurts all businesses that use oil as an input in their production. Again - no one is answering the question of "if these claims are all true, why haven't they always been cutting rates from day one?".

Claim 4: Inflation taxes all moneyholders equally. Very true - but if you're poor, you don't have that much money. If anything, the inflationary cost to moneyholders hurts the rich the most.

Claim 5: When inflation occurs, wages don't automatically adjust, so wage-earners are harmed. That's true, but the effects of inflation are not felt over night. It's a long-term phenomenon, which gives plenty of time for wages to re-adjust. Prices of goods don't just increase overnight.

Fractional reserve banking works fine for the most part, but can be a big problem when there are huge shocks to the system. That was the rationale for the Fed's bailout of Bear. So long as noone makes a run on a bank, illiquidity is not a problem so long as they are holding decent reserves. There hasn't been a run on a bank in ages until recently in Britain.

[curious]

What is going on is not hard to understand. Historian Alexander Tyler said "A democracy can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury."

Author, Alexis de Tocqueville, added to this idea saying, "The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."

Which is why all politicians are corrupt. They earn votes by voting for payouts to their supporters from the public treasury.

Democracy is a bankrupt idea. But, our founding fathers never wanted a democracy, they wanted a republic. They knew a democracy would not work because the masses cannot be trusted not to rob the future generations.

Too many people confuse "democracy" with freedom and liberty when they are not the same things at all.

I don't know what the solution is but that is the problem.

Something that I noticed is that we do not have a legislative body which has the country as a whole as its primary concern. Congressmen represent the states they are from. But, no one represents the COUNTRY. And no one represents the abused taxpayers.

And, the only people who can change this are the corrupt politicians who benefit from it.

[HedgeHog]

Very well put, Curious.

[mathdotcom]

Everyone knows democracy is a crap system. How about suggesting a better replacement?

[curious]

The energy part of this problem could easily be fixed. Brazil did it. Brazil went to a 100% ethanol from SUGAR CANE economy years ago.

The US could do the same. Ethanol from corn is a financial and environmental disaster of epic proportion. Ethanol from sugar cane can be mass produced for under $1.00 per gallon. There are 6 states in the US capable of growing large acreages of sugar cane: Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. The entire Caribbean and Central America are also excellent for growing sugar cane. Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands can both grown sugar cane anywhere you want to plant it.

The US Congress could totally transform the economy of the deep south, the Caribbean, and central America and totally end American dependence on imported oil by simply allowing sugar cane to be grown and processed without restriction.

Right now it is a felony to grow, import, or process sugar cane without special permits which can only be obtained from two senators. The number of acres which can be put into sugar cane production is kept artificially low by these two senators in order to keep the price of sugar artificially high.

Hmm, a solution to the country's number one national security issue and two senators are purposely keeping the solution denied to the country for personal gain. Don't they call that treason?

[curious]

Everyone knows democracy is a crap system. How about suggesting a better replacement?

I did that already. A republic. Which we had until the system our founding fathers gave us was contorted by the DemoCong and Repukes.

[mathdotcom]

You have to be more specific. What kind of republic? How would everything work?

If the system you previously had was contorted into what it is now, then it's not a great system for that reason.

[curious]

You have to be more specific. What kind of republic? How would everything work?

If the system you previously had was contorted into what it is now, then it's not a great system for that reason.

Read the Declaration of Independence, and the US Constitution and you will get the answers you seek.

I am a bit too busy to create a system of government from scratch and explain it in enough detail that it means anything.

[mathdotcom]

You didn't answer my question: if the Declaration and Constitution are best, why have they led to America evolving into what it is now?

[curious]

You didn't answer my question: if the Declaration and Constitution are best, why have they led to America evolving into what it is now?

You need to take a reading class, I did answer your jackass question. Our system was contorted by dishonest, crooked politicians for their own gain. The system we now have is patently illegal in terms of the founding documents. But, what can I do about it? We supposedly have a system of checks and balances, only there is no way to enforce the checks and balances when the legislature acts in a way that is illegal and dishonest.

Two clear examples. The amendment to the constitution which established the personal income tax is clearly illegal. The federal government does not have sovereignty, sovereignty rests with the states, which is why they are called SOVEREIGN states. The federal government cannot levy a personal income tax because they don't have any citizens to tax. This totally absurd amendment gets around this "problem" by setting up a totally illegal scheme. The language talks about a voluntary contract between the central government and the citizens of the sovereign states. If you want to find out how voluntary this contract is just fail to pay your federal income tax one year.

The second clear example was the establishment of the federal reserve banks and granting them the power over the money supply. A TOTALLY unconstitutional act.

I guess if we ever had a President who actually cared about our country he could use his power as commander in chief to right wrongs like this.

The Supreme Court could fix the personal income tax problem by declaring that amendment unconstitutional, which it clearly is, but they refuse to do that.

The list of these kinds of dishonest monkeying with the institutions laid down by the founding fathers is lengthy but easily uncovered by those of us who can actually read.

Do your own research, I don't like arguing with lazy incompetents.

[mathdotcom]

"Our system was contorted by dishonest, crooked politicians for their own gain."

Moron, you're not getting my point. A system that can be 'contorted by dishonest, crooked politicians' is not a good system. We could live without government if we weren't all dishonest, crooked, selfish people.

So if you were to do it all over again, you have to come up with a system where this illegal behaviour you talk about can be prevented.

Don't you see how retarded your argument is? "The system originally implemented was perfect, but it got taken advantage of by crooks." Then it's not perfect, pal.

[purecarnagge]

you guys do realize that we have income taxes to pay our national debt... all these roads and school they talk about being built. They are never really built from income tax...

with that said the central bank is privately owned and the us government takes a loan from them, so we are ****ed eitherway we go. more taxes and more loans....

= weak as hell economy and I bet money greenspan is having a ****ing fit right now...

[curious]

"Our system was contorted by dishonest, crooked politicians for their own gain."

Moron, you're not getting my point. A system that can be 'contorted by dishonest, crooked politicians' is not a good system. We could live without government if we weren't all dishonest, crooked, selfish people.

So if you were to do it all over again, you have to come up with a system where this illegal behaviour you talk about can be prevented.

Don't you see how retarded your argument is? "The system originally implemented was perfect, but it got taken advantage of by crooks." Then it's not perfect, pal.

I didnt' say it was perfect. I said it was better than what we have now.

[curious]

you guys do realize that we have income taxes to pay our national debt... all these roads and school they talk about being built. They are never really built from income tax...

with that said the central bank is privately owned and the us government takes a loan from them, so we are ****ed eitherway we go. more taxes and more loans....

= weak as hell economy and I bet money greenspan is having a ****ing fit right now...

Well, that's another problem. The Constitution gave almost every power to the sovereign states. It gave the federal government the duties of defending the country from outside enemies, being a court system of last resort and regulating commerce between the sovereign states. 99% of what the federal government steals our money to pay for is unconstitutional.