Wednesday, August 02, 2017

Simple solution to all of our problems.

"Lobbying is a controversial and often misunderstood activity. Protected by the First Amendment and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, in its most simple form lobbying is informing government officials as to what a group of citizens wants. This is a fundamental part of democratic government. Since corporations in the U.S. are considered to have some rights of citizenship, they also can engage in this dialogue." (Source)

There is a simple solution to all of our problems... Deny the right of corporations to lobby the government. Not any other of their rights, just that one. If human persons comprise corporations, and human persons can lobby the government, then corporate interests can be represented. On the other hand, as evidenced by our current situations, if corporate persons can lobby the government, human interests cannot be represented. If we fail to fix this problem, government will not truly represent human people. 

Friday, May 05, 2017

The Paradox of White Fragility

Read White Fragility.

The paradox here is that some white people reading this will react to it in exactly the way it describes and predicts. When we're talking about "white power", knowledge is definitely not power...

Friday, February 03, 2017

South Dakota Legislature Fights to Keep Corruption Legal

Can you believe this bullshit?!?!?

South Dakota Senate Repeals Voter-Backed Anti-Corruption Law

If you want to help, please consider a donation to

Wednesday, September 07, 2016

Do You Still Think Congress Represents You?

If you need more proof that the entire political system is a farce, read this Princeton University study. What it proves it that the opinions of the American public have no influence over the formation of public policy. The opinions of the capital elite (mostly operating as "corporate persons") are the only ones that matter. This is not exaggeration, speculation, or cynicism. It's fact.
"The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism."

Sunday, August 07, 2016

But we can fix it!

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

If the Trans Pacific Partnership is passed, any hope that we have to influence our government is officially lost

If the Trans Pacific Partnership is passed, any hope that we have to influence our government is officially lost (and we already have almost no influence). Don't let fear-mongers convince you that the government can take away your inalienable rights. They can't, and that is a smoke-screen... The TPP is more or less the last move in the corporate takeover of our government. And while we're busy arguing with each other into voting or not voting for one oligarch or the other, our government's ability to serve the people in any way shape or form is being taken away. Both Democrats and Republicans will allow the TPP to pass.

So if you are really concerned with civil rights, the environment, being able to own guns, being able to earn a living wage, etc... This is the fight we need to win first. It's not about left vs right or black vs white or gay vs straight or gun vs unarmed or bigot vs non-bigot. It's about people vs corporations.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Empowering Corporations to Attack Nations

Friday, July 22, 2016

Money Makes the Elections Go Round

And round. And round and round... No real option here other than to repeat the cycle. Choose one or the other, the circle keeps rotating around the axis of corporate dollars that own and control electoral politics.

I know wedge issues are really compelling... But no matter which propped up establishment candidate wins the presidential election, no one is taking away your guns, and the progress we've made in the realm of social justice will not be reversed. The left / right dichotomy is a smokescreen. Despite what this graph might convey, even rich / poor is a smokescreen. The fact that it is legal for corporations to bribe elected officials with money and promises of jobs, and that it is legal for unlimited money to be poured into campaign funds from undisclosed sources trumps (no pun intended) every other issue that is on the table at the present moment.

Thursday, July 21, 2016

Honest and Forthright vs Dishonest and Corrupt, Take 2

Okay so apparently someone less lazy than me has been reading my blog, because this exists: The American Anti-Corruption Act. You might think if Citizens United was overturned, everything would be right and good again. You'd be wrong. Here's what we need... And we can pass it via public referendum. Here's a direct copy and paste from their web site. Other than "Prevent politicians from fundraising during working hours" which is definitely not the right solution to that problem, I'll take the rest of it tomorrow...


Make it illegal for politicians to take money from lobbyists.
Politicians get extraordinary sums of money in the form of campaign donations from the special interests who lobby them. In return, politicians create laws favorable to these special interests – even when those laws hurt their constituents.

Under the American Anti-Corruption Act, people who get paid to influence politicians can either lobby or donate – but they can’t do both.

Ban lobbyist bundling. 
Lobbyists regularly bundle together big contributions from their friends and colleagues and deliver them in one lump sum to politicians. This turns lobbyists into valuable fundraisers, giving politicians an incentive to keep them happy by working political favors.
The Act prohibits lobbyists from bundling contributions.

Close the revolving door. 
Lobbyists and special interests routinely offer public servants high-paying lobbying jobs. Politicians and their staff routinely move straight from public office to these lucrative private lobbying jobs, where they get paid to influence their former colleagues.

The Act stops elected representatives and senior staff from selling off their government power for high-paying lobbying jobs, prohibits them from negotiating jobs while in office, and bars them from all lobbying activity for several years once they leave.


Mandate full transparency of all political money. 
Elections are being flooded with secret money funneled through “501c” organizations that are not required to disclose the names of donors. These secretive groups can spend money directly to influence elections and make unlimited contributions to super PACs, which run ads to elect and defeat candidates.

Under the Act, any organization that spends significant funds on political advertisements is required to file a timely online report disclosing its major donors.


Change how elections are funded.
Running a political campaign is expensive, but few Americans can afford to donate to political campaigns. That makes politicians dependent upon – and therefore responsive to – a tiny fraction of special-interest donors.

The Act offers every voter a small credit they can use to make a political donation with no out-of-pocket expense. Candidates and political groups are only eligible to receive these credits if they agree to fundraise solely from small donors and small-donor groups.

Prevent politicians from fundraising during working hours. 
Most federal politicians spend between 3 and 7 hours a day fundraising from big donors instead of legislating on issues that matter to voters.

Under the Act, politicians are prevented from raising money during the workday, when they should be serving their constituents.

Empower small donors over traditional PACs.
Big donors regularly pool together their money in political action committees (PACs) to elect or defeat candidates. These PACs provide wealthy contributors with yet another way to influence political outcomes.

The Act incentivizes the creation of new, small-donor PACs that only accept donations of $100 or less, giving regular voters a stronger voice in our elections.


Crack down on super PACs.
In its Citizens United case, the Supreme Court ruled that super PACs can spend unlimited money influencing elections, so long as they do not coordinate directly with official candidate campaigns. Since then, there has been tremendous coordination between campaigns and their super PACs, making a mockery of the “independence” the courts thought would exist.

The American Anti-Corruption Act enforces the Supreme Court’s mandate by fixing the rules aimed at preventing super PAC coordination.

Eliminate lobbyist loopholes.
Definitions of who is a lobbyist are weak and outdated. As a result, former politicians and their staff can receive big money to influence policy without formally registering as lobbyists.
The Act prevents lobbyists from skirting the rules by strengthening the definition of lobbying and penalizing lobbyists who fail to register.

Strengthen anti-corruption enforcement.
Agencies routinely fail to enforce the anti-corruption rules that already exist, because their leaders are appointed by the very politicians they are supposed to regulate. The result is an elections system where even lax rules can be skirted or broken with impunity.

The Act fixes the broken Federal Election Commission and gives prosecutors the tools they need to combat corruption.

Thursday, April 21, 2016

$15 Minimum Wage is Not the Answer

While I got this image from a Bernie Sanders post on Facebook, I 100% disagree with his stance on the minimum wage issue.

Raising the minimum wage will cause inflation and will cause small businesses to fold because they can't afford to double their prices to pay their employees. No the answer is a maximum wage cap. Too much money is being funneled to the top of the pyramid. We don't re-balance by putting more money on the bottom of the pyramid... We simply don't need our economy to have unfettered exponential growth forever. We need people to stop being so greedy. Megalomaniacs have been in control for far too long. We don't take them down by demanding larger crumbs...

Sunday, July 05, 2015

Elections Don't Mean Much Unless You Hire Lobbyists

I don't know anything about or their plan, but clearly we agree that legalized corruption is the single biggest problem in the world. 

FACT: Congress votes how lobbyists tell them to

Saturday, December 27, 2014

You Certainly Can't Eat a Credit Default Swap

Correlation does not equal causation. However... It is a fact that the vast majority of our world's gold reserves are owned by governments, central banks, and the ultra-rich. The price of gold over the past 40 years coincides with some very interesting events. You've heard the term "you can't eat gold", implying that its practical value to the everyday man is low? Well... For about 40 years after the Great Depression, the price of gold was pinned to the price of the dollar. Gold cost $35 per ounce. About 40 years ago, the Bretton Woods Agreement was dismantled, and the price of gold was "unpinned" from the dollar. Shortly after Reagan took office, the price of gold rose to $600 per ounce. That's a 1700% increase in a commodity that sat stable for the previous 40 years. 

If you haven't heard the term "profit-taking", that's when people sell commodities because their margins are ridiculously good and they're about to become seriously rich. Gold sat stable at $400 per ounce with some small fluctuations until the latter years of the Clinton administration. Since 2001, its trend has mimicked the same general behavior as it did about 40 years prior. And now it appears to be more or less stabilizing at $1,200 per ounce. Only a 300% increase in the average price this time, and it took longer to unfold. But this is based off of a previous 1700% increase just 40 years prior... So in about a 40 year span, we're talking about close to 4000% increase in the price of an actual physical measurable substance that is owned mostly by governments and banks. 

This below goes from 1800 through 2013. For some perspective. The Y scale is represented logarithmically so that you can actually see the few changes between 1800 and 1970, and you don't have to spend too much time scrolling from the top to the bottom like you might if it were linear like the graph above. The correlation here is between the inequality of wealth and the price of gold. Specific events have occurred which, through profit-taking, allowed a very few people and a very few nations to acquire previously unimaginably vast sums of wealth. This new wealth has been used to fuel a derivatives market that has ballooned to about $600 trillion in total "worth". Control of and benefit from that money is concentrated in the hands of a very few investment firms, banks, and governments. The actual inequality of wealth between the "powers that be" and "you and me" has grown exponentially and really unfathomably... 

The manipulation that has allowed this was first of the gold market, and now of the derivatives market. Here's the best part... the value of the derivatives market is called its "notional value". That it has any value at all is only a notion (it's literally imaginary). Since 2007 there has been $300 TRILLION imagined into existence by people buying insurance policies against other people's loans or some such bullshit. The "credit exposure" is the amount of this imaginary $600T that has been extended to a borrower by a lender. So there's about $30 trillion worth of money that people have imagined into existence and then loaned to someone else. As you can see, most of the notional value is tied up in interest rates... 

It's still true that correlation doesn't equal causation and one possibility is that all of this has come to be due to coincidence and mismanagement. But I think we can all agree that there is a lot of truth to the saying "money makes the world go round". So... the important question is... what makes the money go around? And it would be damned interesting to know who made out in profit-taking on Gold in 1980 and 2011...

Consume Misinformation in the Wake of Violence

[was written in April of 2013 but not published]

I'm sure that at least some of us watching the news on the seemingly senseless and as of yet completely unsolved Boston Marathon bombing atrocity and the supposedly unrelated simultaneous JFK Library fire knew that something was fishy... Hours after a public bombing... and no organization has claimed responsibility and no one has been caught. And the bombing--no wait--fire--no... bombing--no it was just a fire, we're sure--... yeah that is unrelated.

UNRELATED? Seriously?? I mean I know fires sometime do just happen... But this was a few minutes apart. And the fire was officially caused by a bomb or incendiary device, so it was no accident. My first job out of audio engineering school happened to be at the Presidential Archives in the JFK Library. I showed them how to use Cool Edit Pro to apply noise reduction and other audio forensics on classified presidential audio recordings. The fire was located in the aforementioned archives, which are quite large and contain many classified documents and other media from various federal agencies.  But this is unrelated? I'm sorry but I call bullshit.

The FBI is there running the show, MA State Police, Boston, Revere, Malden, and other local cops are there, even the Secret Service is already on the scene. Trust me this is not just the local cops (who, in Boston, are no joke) that got fooled here. Security for this event had been planned for months by people who know what they are doing...

Are you telling me that the surveillance cameras already in Boston got nothing from the area? And the security at the JFK Library got nothing? And that the aforementioned law enforcement agencies don't each have teams of analysts and interns pouring through footage? And they haven't found a thing...

Given the variables involved here... the devices may have been crude but my gut tells me this was not just some emotionally fucked up lone-perpetrator operation. This having been said, please view the following piece of misinformation:

Dan Bidondi is probably correct that this was a false flag operation. But he didn't do anyone any justice by asking the question like that. He comes off as combative and ridiculous. The presentation is simply awful. Deval Patrick waited for him to finish his incoherent question and then said "No. Next question." Perfect answer, by the way. And Bidondi presents himself (and by extension anyone who thinks there could be such a thing as a false flag attack on American citizens) as unreasonable, nonsensical, and daft. In fact, there is long documented history showing that False Flag attacks and tactics have been practices by American law-enforcement agencies for hundreds of years, and more recently it has become increasingly commonplace.

What I wished had been asked, with a calm and even tone no matter how awesome the local Boston dialectic accent: "What exactly happened at the JFK Library? What caused the fire? What is in the library archives that the fire was near? Was anything damaged? Do we know who did it, and what they may have been targeting?"

Whether or not you believe in any sort or conspiracy about anything--the facts are that many classified documents related to the JFK assassination are located in the those archives. These documents (if they have not been destroyed or meddled with) are due to be declassified on Dec 31 of this year, it being 50 years after these documents were classified, pursuant to Executive Order 13526.

Connecting the dots is something people are too afraid to do for fear of the most simple and rational explanation being correct. They'd rather wait for an "official" story and believe it no matter how implausible it may seem. So Bostonians are simply waiting. Our local new is fixated on describing the violence in as much brutal detail as possible, and have little to no actual information on what happened. We found ourselves in the same situation 12 years ago when building 7 caught fire. Who cares about building 7 when dozens of people are dying at this instant, and my sister is probably stuck on the subway without power? And seriously, who cares about the library when an 8 year old boy has died, much less when he's one of three and dozens of people (some of who were friends of close friends of mine) lost limbs and almost 200 people injured? No one.

FOIA request against private Kennedy docs held at JFK Library in Feb 2013 goes to court.

JFK Library reports a few "artifact storage rooms" had water damage.

Sunday, November 11, 2012

There Actually is an Independent US Senator

There is a US Senator who isn't a member of either of the two major parties... Bernie Sanders from Vermont. He's the 1%--of the Senate who is not a Democrat or Republican. Here's what he has to say to the other 99%:

“The Wall Street leaders whose recklessness and illegal behavior caused this terrible recession are now lecturing the American people on the need for courage to deal with the nation’s finances and deficit crisis. Before telling us why we should cut Social Security, Medicare and other vitally important programs, these CEOs might want to take a hard look at their responsibility for causing the deficit and this terrible recession.”

“Our Wall Street friends might also want to show some courage of their own by suggesting that the wealthiest people in this country, like them, start paying their fair share of taxes. They might work to end the outrageous corporate loopholes, tax havens and outsourcing provisions that their lobbyists have littered throughout the tax code - contributing greatly to our deficit.”

If the outcome of the state ballot questions for Montana (very red state, voted in an anti-corporate initiative with 75% support) and Colorado (blue state, voted in an anti-corporate initiative with 74% support) are any indication, Sanders' opinion would ring true with over 70% support amongst the voting population.
  1. Colorado Corporate Contributions Amendment Results
There were also MANY local non-binding ballot questions regarding overturning Citizens United. About 75 to 80% in favor of overturning. The time is right to support candidates free from corporate ties and to support pro-people initiatives on local, state, and federal ballots.

Have any of the other 99 US Senators will dared speak this way about their masters? Probably... Will any of them do something about it? If they want to keep getting elected, they'd better.

Will it really do any good? Well, it can't hurt. But it will probably not help as much as it should. Because enough people in positions of power are corrupt...

Tuesday, November 06, 2012

More inequality facts

If you don't vote, you don't get an opinion.

To those who would make the argument that if someone doesn't vote, they don't get to complain about politics. Ok, if that's true... When a person does vote, you can't cut them off in the middle of their argument and go on to the next talking point. You actually have to listen. Is the other person repeating the talking points that are opposed to the ones you have heard and internalized, from either side of the pro-establishment corporate media? Or is this person talking to you saying something different altogether? Perhaps responding with your memorized talking points aimed at disarming their memorized talking points is not the best come-back... And more importantly, you will refuse to let the media that is owned and operated by the same banks and corporations that own and operate our government and our political system steer you towards the candidates that they themselves have preselected by blocking other perfectly legitimate candidates from the debates. We cannot continue to allow our country to be run like this any longer...

You keep voting for the people who are doing this...

We keep electing Democrats and Republicans, despite the fact that this is what they are doing... 

Still looking for data that goes up through 2012. The growth rate of this inequality is exponential. The income of the top .01% is now growing faster than the rest of us at the rate of hundreds of percentage points.

Found this from 2010:

Monday, October 15, 2012

Average CEO Salary 380 Times That of Worker.

The bigger a company gets, for the most part, the more their CEO will make in comparison to the average worker. While it is good for companies to look for this sort of profit per unit of work ratio on their own ledger sheets, when C-suite salaries are all in 7-figures that's probably a good place to stop... There comes a point where a corporations' continued growth and prosperity ought not to be funneled at even higher and higher concentrations to those on the top.

I mean sure, your company makes 25 billion dollars per year, the CEO should be entitled to at least 25 million, right? sure, why not, capitalism rah rah and all that. but if you are going to take that 25 million and have the average salary at your company come in at a whopping 75K per year, not to mention off-shore labor at $2.25 a day... well you sir or madam, are being rather selfish...

Even the corporate media are talking about it... Though they're careful never to bite the hand that feeds them..

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Root Cause Analysis

Issue: Excess and Inequality.

Many people who claim to care are focused on what is being done by Democrats and Republicans and in agonizing over the distinctions between the two... But we've come to the point where no one can deny that the ultra-rich have both parties in their pockets. This is not opinion or some conspiracy theory. The Supreme Court has allowed it to be so. Both parties--and indeed the very laws that they create--are now unquestionably steered by the hands of extreme wealth and power. Which one of them wins elections for local, state or federal government elected offices does not alter the overall direction of things. It really hasn't for quite some time.

Root Cause: The root of the problem is the desire to be ultra-rich. This is a common thread amongst people who are power-hungry and greedy, and it's really more of a sociopathic mental illness than a problem with government in essence.

Resolution: The issue remains unresolved. In fact, income inequality is getting really out of control in a serious way, and fast. The issue continues to worsen despite the already observed economic and environmental consequences because the vast majority of the population willfully allows sociopaths who horde wealth and power to make decisions for all of our futures in their own best interests.

Corrective Action: Properly fixing the issue will take years of willful determination by the vast majority of the public. A good start would be to first wake up at least half of the population who should be livid but are instead caught up in social programming which tells them not to rock the boat. A reasonable next step after that is complete would be revert effective tax rates and campaign funding limitations to what were in effect prior to the Reagan era.

At some point we will probably want to insert some filters into our social system that will weed out individuals who show signs of being greedy and power-hungry and attempt to treat this horrible social disorder.

Excess and inequality cannot be allowed to further degrade the state of our world.

Sunday, November 06, 2011

Are you filthy rich, or honestly rich?

I have nothing against someone who has an overabundance of money. I have everything against someone who obtains an overabundance of money at the expense of others via corruption, dishonesty, and selfish intentions.

Friday, November 04, 2011


Let's get something clear here: Democrats and Republicans are both the parties of the upper class. Their voting records prove that beyond any shadow of a doubt. They both are owned by the upper class and constitute one half of the powers that be (owners of central banks, mass media conglomerates, energy conglomerates, the military industrial complex, etc., etc., etc.). The goal of each party in the long run is to make sure that at least 25% of the nation hates them and will vote for the other so they don't win. In this way the upper class has maintained control of the government for hundreds of years with only a 50% voting rate. and some don't vote because we realize that you cannot win unless you vote democrat or republican. if you want to "acknowledge" class warfare, then sure, vote for the upper class... but to go so far as to actually end class warfare, you simply cannot vote for democrats or republicans. they are waging class warfare against those who are not super-rich like their owners are.

Controlled Opposition Can't Fight Honesty and Forthrightness

If history is any indicator, i think it's reasonable to believe that the occupy movements have been infiltrated by counter-insurgents, agent provacateurs, however you want to say it. Having been a close observer on the inside of the Green Party in 2000, I can confirm that counter-insurgents use the concept of "democracy" to dilute the substance of arguments with the process of consensus. So much so that at this point the "unofficial official demands of Occupy Wall Street" may not even be known amongst all the people who have been sleeping in tents in the cold to prove a point. I'm not there, so i guess i really don't know... but to me, it's the point that is the important part.

The point is that honesty, forthrightness, forethought, and respect for the long-term sustainability of our culture (and i'm not talking natural resources, but actual society and culture here) are qualities we lack in our current system of government. In fact these things are not even just "lacking a little bit", they are nowhere to be found... If you scroll back through this blog's history you will see that I've been trying to make this point for years, sometimes indirectly and sometimes directly. The signs have been clear for a while.

Forget trying to pass laws... a system of laws that has already been usurped by the greedy and power-hungry cannot be fixed by passing laws.

To simply introduce the concept of forthrightness is a revolutionary act.
But it's the simple things like honesty and forthrightness that we need most in government right now. And there are far too few people in government--regardless of how much money they make or which corporate boards they sit on--that represent these basic qualities that we should demand of every public servant. And until this really is a movement of the 99%, a campaign slogan of "honesty and forthrightness first" won't get you too far...

I would estimate that currently most Americans either don't give a damn about about any of this beyond what they hear on the news and they would perceive that i am taking a contrary viewpoint to that of the dominant social order and call me a nut job and dismiss anything I say without any real consideration. and this is by design. Our system of education is a myth, our televisions are keeping us quite occupied, thank you, and our money system is a pyramid scheme which we all worship.

Not even a full 99% of us would need to realize this and act on it to right the ship... I think honestly, a vocal minority of 30 or 40% could do some real good! And we're not quite there yet. But at least there may be fewer of you these days that think I'm crazy for saying so...

Thursday, November 03, 2011

Suggestion for an Internet Search

Try this one on for size: "occupy movement controlled opposition". You're going to find a lot of complete and utter BS, but buried in the hundreds and hundreds of articles, videos, and blog posts, you're going to find pretty compelling evidence that like the Tea Party, Occupy Wall Street (and elsewhere) started as a legitimate grass-roots movement but has been usurped and infiltrated by the establishment. Don't be surprised, they've been doing it for decades...

Monday, October 17, 2011

Hey Occupiers: Demand Repeal of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act!

I'm going to guess that 99% of the so-called 99% doesn't know what the Gramm-Leach-Blily Act is. Most people who haven't read the entire newspaper every day for the past 15 years probably don't either. I certainly hadn't heard of this act until recently... Like most legislation, we were all purposefully distracted towards other things when it was proposed and passed. Unless you watch C-SPAN on the regular or you are a banking/economics junkie, you just didn't hear about it. And if you did hear about it when it was passed in 1999, you might not have realized that it would be solely responsible for creating the worst financial crisis since the 30s. It overturns a law that was passed in 1933 (in the wake of the depression) and explicitly allows the same corporations to operate commercial banks, investment banks, and insurance companies. If we were to overturn this law and break up the companies that are "too big to fail", it would not fix the ridiculous inequality of wealth in the world today. But it would surely help to stabilize our economy.

Without clear demands, what good are protests, really?

Sunday, October 09, 2011

Occupy Yourself

Happy Sunday, folks. Hope this finds you well, which I know is still possible but less and less likely in earnest these days... The economic conditions are shrinking the middle-class and punishing the poor. What should be our right as sovereign beings (to purchase property, raise a family, take care of them and educate them) now requires at least two full-time incomes and a mountain of debt. our job in society, really, is to keep the money flowing. of course--money makes the world go round... well, money being nothing more than the issuing government's debt to the central bank ( | |, debt makes the money go round. i think most of us would be ok with the compromise of a great quality of life in exchange for participation in this system. however, the quality of life we should be receiving in exchange for our participation in the "money-is-debt" system has quickly eroded, while--as is now popular to note--1% of the world owns the overwhelming majority of the world's money. those who are less effective at creating large amounts debt (ironically, the poor) are being pushed out of the possibility of their right to experience a life of dignity and productivity.

Which brings us to the "product" in productivity. Money. In the 21st century--currency is a product. just like the businesses that compete to gain market share of any other product, the makers of currency (central banks) will have healthy competition in their market, and as we have seen, the larger banks will buy out the smaller ones and we will eventually end up with enough diversity in our banks to count on one hand. Governments will have little say in the matter, as they are beholden to the central bank to honor that the bonds that they print will be turned into money. America's history of bank-favored monetary policy is living proof of this truth. And this isn't an America-centric issue, of course. Take the Euro for example.

at some point, there was a deal or set of decisions amongst the owners of Europe's banks that all European countries will consolidate their debt and funnel it all to one central bank that would issue one currency... Public consent was manufactured by the mass-media, and this bank deal manifested itself as the European Union. central banks are are holding trillions of dollars of debt over all of the world governments' heads. so yes, democratic countries will have votes and the talking heads in the mainstream media will advise you to think one of two ways about it and there will be spirited debate amongst those in the world governments--those who are bought and sold by the same central banks. the medium for such debate and discussion will of course be the mainstream media, which is owned by the same corporations and banks that own our governments. The best part is, those who sit on the boards that oversee each of these central banks have been appointed only at the explicit approval of the bank itself (this is true, read the Federal Reserve Act or any other Central Bank's charter with the government(s) it does business with)... and in the end--the corporate merger on the currency market in Europe takes place, and the Euro is born.

we will probably see the same sort of thing happen all around the world, slowly. central banks, being companies like any other only dealing in currency and selling to governments, will compete with each other. the stronger companies will buy out the weaker ones (this is happening in droves in America right now) and in the end, you end up with one world currency. This is not some grand new world order conspiracy theory. it's the truth. it's already well under way. the evidence is all around us, hidden in plain sight.

the good news is that lately more people have recognized what's going on. we here are we are willing to fight, but can we be patient enough to win? i for one am hopeful... to stop the central banks from consolidating our governments and our currency thus dissolving our sovereignty as a free people, we have a few vital tasks to accomplish, none of which are tenable without a major commitment from a majority of the population. 1) end corporate personhood. 2) re-wrte the federal reserve act, give our government the power to issue currency without a central bank if the people so choose. 3) end corruption in government and big business.

yes, without all three, we more of less have no power to alter this course. even if we can muster the will and selflessness necessary to accomplish the first two, the third one is going to be tricky... people who seek the vast amounts of power afforded to the rulers of the world's great corporations, banks, and governments tend to be power-hungry, extremely intelligent, and highly successful. that's the profile of a diabolical genius if i ever heard of one... and while not everyone in power is a sociopath, there are certainly a fair amount of people that fit this profile. so you can see the terrible amount and the almost infinite degree of difficulty of the work ahead of us if we are going to stop this train from going down its current track.

and to make matters more complicated, in order to survive we MUST use means that do not involve derailing the train. the sad truth is we are all on this train of our own accord by participating in the money system. non-violence--even in the face of what the police have already done and what the army is likely to do when we continue the fight--is the only method that will work. and there are plenty of options for you to contribute positively that don't involve sit-ins or protests at all. making personal choices like buying local, participating in CSAs, investment in small-scale renewable energy and local energy cooperatives, getting involved in your local governments, and keeping your money and your debt in the hands of credit unions rather than banks--all of these things will help our society to push the train onto the right track.

stay hopeful. stay positive. be proactive. if we ever really do get 99% of Americans to get "down with the program," we will prevail.

Friday, January 22, 2010

Banking Legislation Passed 12/11/2009

HR 4173

This is just the summary... Passed without nary a word...


Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 - Financial Stability Improvement Act of 2009

Directs the Comptroller General to audit and report to Congress on all actions taken by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve Board) and the Federal Reserve Banks during the current economic crisis pursuant to specified authority granted under the Federal Reserve Act. Establishes a Financial Services Oversight Council, consisting of the heads of specified federal financial regulatory bodies and chaired by the Secretary of the Treasury, to:

(1) resolve a dispute among two or more federal financial regulatory agencies in specified circumstances;

(2) subject a financial company to stricter prudential standards; and

(3) require a financial holding company to undertake one or more mitigatory actions to address any grave threat its activities pose to the financial stability or economy of the United States.

Directs the Federal Reserve Board to impose stricter prudential standards on a financial holding company in certain circumstances. Authorizes the Council to subject a financial activity or practice to stricter prudential standards for financial stability purposes. Amends the Home Owners' Loan Act to establish a Division of Thrift Supervision within the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Abolishes the Office of Thrift Supervision and transfers its functions and personnel to the Division. Amends the Revised Statutes of the United States to direct the Secretary to appoint up to five Deputy Comptrollers of the Currency, including a Senior Deputy Comptroller for National Banks and a Senior Deputy Comptroller for Thrift Supervision. Amends the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA) to place the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board on the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in lieu of the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision. Amends the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 to prescribe requirements for the treatment of industrial loan companies, savings associations, special purpose holding companies, and certain other companies. Prohibits certain conversions of troubled banks and thrifts. Amends the FDIA to revise requirements for calculating a depository institution's assessment.

Credit Risk Retention Act of 2009 - Amends the Securities Act of 1933 to direct the appropriate federal financial regulatory agencies to prescribe regulations to require any creditor to retain an economic interest in a material portion of the credit risk of any loan the creditor transfers, sells, or conveys to a third party, including for the purpose of including such loan in a pool of loans backing an issuance of asset-backed securities.

Dissolution Authority for Large, Interconnected Financial Companies Act of 2009 - Prescribes a procedure under which the Secretary shall appoint the FDIC as receiver for one year to resolve, liquidate, or take other specified emergency stabilization actions with respect to a financial company whose imminent or actual default would have serious adverse effects on financial stability or economic conditions in the United States. Requires the FDIC Inspector General, if the Secretary appoints the FDIC as receiver for a financial company, to establish an Office of Resolution to audit and investigate the activities of the FDIC in its capacity as receiver for that company. Amends the Federal Reserve Act to prescribe requirements for financial crisis management actions by the Federal Reserve Board in the event of a liquidity event that could destabilize the U.S. financial system. Establishes a Council of Inspectors General on Financial Oversight. Amends the International Banking Act of 1978 to authorize the Federal Reserve Board to terminate the activities of the U.S. branch, agency, or subsidiary of a foreign bank that presents a systemic risk to the United States.

Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act of 2009 - Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to require a separate, non-binding shareholder vote to approve the compensation, including golden parachute compensation, of corporate and financial institution executives. Requires each member of the compensation committee of the board of directors of an issuer of securities to be independent.

Over-the-Counter Derivatives Markets Act of 2009 - Amends the Commodity Exchange Act to require joint regulation of swap markets by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Requires swap repositories, swap dealers, major swap participants, and swap execution facilities to register with the CFTC. Repeals the exemption from CFTC regulation of derivatives transaction execution facilities and boards of trade. Revises requirements for foreign boards of trade. Authorizes the CFTC and the SEC to ban:

(1) abusive swaps; and

(2) access to the U.S. financial system of any entity domiciled in a foreign country whose regulation of swaps or security-based swaps markets in that country undermines the stability of the U.S. financial system.

Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to repeal the prohibition on regulation of security-based swaps and applies specified requirements to such swaps.

Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act of 2009 - Establishes the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) as an independent agency to regulate the provision of consumer financial products or services. Prescribes related requirements for examination and enforcement for small insured depository institutions (with total assets of $10 billion or less) by the FDIC and credit unions (with total assets of $1.5 billion or less) by the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA). Directs the CFPA to develop risk-based programs to supervise nondepository covered persons. Authorizes the CFPA to take actions to prohibit unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in connection with any transaction with a consumer for, or any offering of, a consumer financial product or service. Specifies prohibited acts. Requires the CFPA Director to lead a Negotiated Rulemaking Committee to promulgate appraisal independence requirements for residential loan purposes. Specifies the preservation of the civil enforcement powers of state attorneys general. Prescribes standards for federal preemption of state law regarding national banks and subsidiaries and federal savings associations. Specifies CFPA enforcement powers. Transfers to the CFPA the consumer financial protection functions of the Federal Reserve Board, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, the FDIC, the Federal Trade Commission, the NCUA, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Prescribes requirements for the collection and use by the CFPA of deposit account and small business data. Requires the CFPA Director to conduct an annual financial autopsy regarding bankruptcies and foreclosures, including any specific financial products or services that have caused substantial numbers of them.

Private Fund Investment Advisers Registration Act of 2009 - Amends the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to require private fund investment advisers to register with the SEC and maintain records and make reports on systemic risk data. Exempts venture capital fund advisers from the registration requirements. Directs the SEC to exempt from registration requirements any investment adviser of a private fund with assets under management in the United States of less than $150 million.

Accountability and Transparency in Rating Agencies Act of 2009 - Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to revise requirements for regulation of nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (NRSROs). Requires the SEC to examine NRSRO credit ratings to review whether an NRSRO has established a system of internal controls and adhered to it. Directs the SEC to:

(1) establish an office to administer SEC rules with respect to NRSRO practices; and

(2) eliminate the exemption of NRSROs from the Fair Disclosure Rule. Directs the SEC to establish a Credit Ratings Agency Advisory Board.

Investor Protection Act of 2009 - Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to establish an Investor Advisory Committee to the SEC. Authorizes the SEC to engage in consumer testing. Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to direct the SEC to promulgate rules to prescribe a fiduciary standard of conduct for a broker or dealer when providing personalized investment advice about securities to a retail customer. Authorizes the SEC to prohibit or limit agreements that require customers or clients of any broker, dealer, or municipal securities dealer to engage in pre-dispute arbitration. Establishes within the SEC a Capital Markets Safety Board. Directs the SEC to report to specified congressional committees on the implementation of SEC reforms in the wake of the discovery of fraud by Bernie Madoff.Authorizes the SEC and the CFTC to form and operate a joint advisory committee. Prescribes or revises prohibitions and requirements relating to:

(1) securities lending;

(2) lost and stolen securities; and

(3) fingerprinting of personnel of registered securities information processors, national securities exchanges, and national securities associations.

Declares that any condition, stipulation, or provision binding any person to waive compliance with any rule of a self-regulatory organization shall be void. Directs the Comptroller General to study and report to Congress on the SEC revolving door. Establishes a Financial Reporting Forum to discuss immediate and long-term issues critical to financial reporting. Directs the SEC Chairman to appoint an SEC Ombudsman. Amends the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970 with respect to, among other specified items, an increased:

(1) assessment paid by Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) members;

(2) borrowing limit on Treasury loans; and

(3) cash limit of protection. Amends the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 with respect to:

(1) the Public Company Accounting Oversight (PCAO) Board oversight of auditors of brokers and dealers; and

(2) foreign regulatory information sharing, and related matters.

Directs the PCAO Board to appoint an ombudsman. Directs the SEC to establish a program of grants to states for enhanced protection of seniors from misleading and fraudulent marketing of financial products. Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to require municipal financial advisers to register with the SEC.

Federal Insurance Office Act of 2009 –

Establishes in the Treasury the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) to:

(1) monitor the insurance industry;

(2) recommend to the Financial Services Oversight Council that it designate an insurer as one subject to stricter standards;

(3) assist in administering the Terrorism Insurance Program; and

(4) perform other related duties. Preempts a state insurance measure only to the extent it:

(1) directly results in less favorable treatment of a non-U.S. insurer domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction that is subject to a covered agreement than a U.S. insurer domiciled, licensed, admitted, or otherwise authorized in that state; and

(2) is inconsistent with such a covered agreement. Requires the FIO Director to study and report to specified congressional committees on:

(1) the global reinsurance market; and

(2) how to modernize and improve the system of insurance regulation in the United States.

This is who is auditing the Fed

your money is in his hands.

Sunday, December 06, 2009

Reflect Refract, War in Iraq

I now disagree with some of what I've written in the past--or at least feel like I have a better understanding of some of the big picture and have stopped focusing so much on specific conspiracies. Though I still do think it's important always to recognize that the conspiratorial view of history is factually accurate.

People in power do indeed conspire to keep that power, they always have and they always will. Their first tactic is to become invisible via their ownership of mass media. Banks and monied incorporations own the world's governments, religions, and also ALL of the public's supposedly independent mass media news sources. Governments are subsidiaries of international corporate conglomerates. Follow the money, you'll see that this is 100% true. Their product is complicity in the consumer culture and their consumer is the world population. Wars are nothing but hostile business transactions. Different companies (vis a vis their ownership rights to governments) sacrifice "consumers" (people) to each other for larger market share. Typically in wars, those sacrificed in greater numbers are those who are less active consumers.

Example: In the early 90s, an estimated 100,000 Iraqis were killed in Desert Storm. About 200 American troops were sacrificed in that same conflict.In 2001, 3,000 Americans die in a brutal and tragic attack on the twin towers (regardless of you think who or what was responsible, we will not argue that it was indeed brutal and tragic). Between 2003 and 2009, an additional 5,000+ US soldiers are sacrificed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Between 2003 and 2009, as few as 100,000 and as many as 600,000 Iraqi civilians are sacrificed in war.

After some simple math, we now know that since 1990, in the two major Middle East wars, we've got at least 200,000 dead Iraqis (probably closer to 500,000, so let's go with 300K dead Iraqis and Afghans for the sake of argument), and less than 10,000 American casualties, and probably another 5,000 Western European casualties (data sources available in previously linked articles). In my view, the loss of one life is no less tragic if the human who owned that life was born in Baghdad or Brooklyn... The sheer loss of life in these wars is simply mind-boggling. It feels kind of morbid to break it down with objective analysis... but... The percent loss breaks down like this:

Casualties since 2003, sources above

Now let's consider the global GDP distribution by country, considering the % share for the involved parties.


The analysis, while morbid, does paint a pretty clear picture. The companies that own the US military (and use the financial system to funnel money to themselves via the their co-ownership of governments with the other international mega-conglomerate companies) are winning in their offensive against the people of the world in their endeavor to control more of our money by sacrificing vastly larger amounts of life of those people who are accustomed to consuming less.

Seems fairly clear to me... Loss of life is HUGELY skewed towards nations with lower GDP. Weapons manufacturers and military contracting companies being mostly international entities, which nation loses life is not their concern. Their concern is which nations' government and bank can they extract money from easily and in high volume. Makes sense that those nations which can keep funneling hundreds of billions of dollars per year to these companies always win the wars, and that those in power of multinational mega-conglomerate corporations profit in either case.

War is a cut-and-dry example of corporations asserting their power over nations and using human life as a bargaining chip. People/entities in power use that power to remain in power. Corporations continue to live by eating and breathing money. Many trillions of dollars in the world today exists solely due to banks and governments having created that money out of debt. Money, power, war.

Welcome to the Thomas Jefferson's nightmare: "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Sunday, October 25, 2009

The Financial Sector Has Five Lobbyists for Every Congressperson

Think about it...

Tuesday, May 05, 2009

Swine Flu Death Rate 0.08% of total Flu Death Rate in US over past 2 weeks

Death rate extrapolations for USA for Flu: 63,729 per year, 5,310 per month, 1,225 per week, 174 per day, 7 per hour, 0 per minute, 0 per second. Note: this extrapolation calculation uses the deaths statistic: 63,730 annual deaths for influenza and pneumonia (NVSR Sep 2001); estimated 20,000 deaths from flu (NIAID)

Swine Flu, US, 2009: 2 deaths
Source: Mainstream TV News Caster, May 5, 2009

2 swine flu deaths / 2450 total flu deaths = 0.08%
(1225 total flu deaths per week * 2 weeks)

Friday, October 10, 2008

The Direction We're Not Moving In

I heard something on the mainstream news last nite that actually made sense. This recent crisis is more about fear than any sort of underlying economic problem... When prices are kept artificially high for years, people panic when they start to come down. that panic leads to "SELLSELLSELL!!" which leads to prices coming down even more, which leads to more "SELLSELLSELL!" If there were no bailout, eventually the panic would subside and things would stabilize at a sustainable level. The % of our GDP that is tied up in the financial sector would shrink, and the % of our GDP related to manufacturing, technology, etc would increase. The hundreds of billions in evaporated wealth due to the stock market crash would not magically reappear--it would be gone (not that it ever really had any right to exist in the first place), wages might come down a bit, values of savings would decrease, and that obviously would suck for a lot of people... But homes would be affordable. Energy would be affordable. Food would be affordable. And we could move forward in a slightly more sustainable fashion. Too bad, we're not moving in that direction... Not yet at least.

Thursday, October 09, 2008


Demand that Congress immediately redress and pass this bill. It's our only hope.

HR 2755 IH

1st Session
H. R. 2755

To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.

June 15, 2007
Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This Act may be cited as the `Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act'.


(a) In General- Effective at the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and each Federal reserve bank are hereby abolished.
(b) Repeal of Federal Reserve Act- Effective at the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Reserve Act is hereby repealed.
(c) Disposition of Affairs-
(1) MANAGEMENT DURING DISSOLUTION PERIOD- During the 1-year period referred to in subsection (a), the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System--
(A) shall, for the sole purpose of winding up the affairs of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks--
(i) manage the employees of the Board and each such bank and provide for the payment of compensation and benefits of any such employee which accrue before the position of such employee is abolished; and
(ii) manage the assets and liabilities of the Board and each such bank until such assets and liabilities are liquidated or assumed by the Secretary of the Treasury in accordance with this subsection; and
(B) may take such other action as may be necessary, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, to wind up the affairs of the Board and the Federal reserve banks.
(A) IN GENERAL- The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall liquidate all assets of the Board and the Federal reserve banks in an orderly manner so as to achieve as expeditious a liquidation as may be practical while maximizing the return to the Treasury.
(B) TRANSFER TO TREASURY- After satisfying all claims against the Board and any Federal reserve bank which are accepted by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and redeeming the stock of such banks, the net proceeds of the liquidation under subparagraph (A) shall be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury and deposited in the General Fund of the Treasury.
(3) ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITIES- All outstanding liabilities of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks at the time such entities are abolished, including any liability for retirement and other benefits for former officers and employees of the Board or any such bank in accordance with employee retirement and benefit programs of the Board and any such bank, shall become the liability of the Secretary of the Treasury and shall be paid from amounts deposited in the general fund pursuant to paragraph (2) which are hereby appropriated for such purpose until all such liabilities are satisfied.
(d) Report- At the end of the 18-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall submit a joint report to the Congress containing a detailed description of the actions taken to implement this Act and any actions or issues relating to such implementation that remain uncompleted or unresolved as of the date of the report.

Sunday, October 05, 2008

Money as Debt

I've said this before... but in light of our nation's most recent exhibit of obvious control of government by central banks, I'm going to say it again, and say it loud:

Everyone knows that money makes the world go round... So what makes the money go round?!?!

Very very few individuals know how money is created, much less how it came to be this way. There isn't one class taught in any of our public schools that explains it. Even in our institutions of higher learning in degree tracts such as economics, business and finance, etc., the simple and fundamental truths about how today's monetary system operates or how it originated is not explained. There's almost no way to get access to this information via the regular channels. One must seek the answer to this question themselves.

The video below is about as accurate, simple and concise as you can get. I highly recommend it.

Friday, October 03, 2008

Welcome to the U.S.S.A.

Thursday, October 02, 2008

The Bailout Bill DOES NOT Restrict Executive Pay!!

You've all heard one of the selling points of the bailout bill... that it would restrict the compensation of executives in companies who accepted the bailout. This is a half-truth. It does not restrict their compensation. It restricts the amount that is tax deductible to the company... Read the bill below...

(a) DENIAL OF DEDUCTION.—Subsection (m) of section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an applicable employer, no deduction shall be allowed under this chapter—
(i) in the case of executive remuneration for any applicable taxable year which is attributable to services performed by a covered executive during such applicable taxable year, to the extent that the amount of such remuneration exceeds $500,000, or ‘‘(ii) in the case of deferred deduction executive remuneration for any taxable year for services performed during any applicable taxable year by a covered executive, to the extent that the amount of such remuneration exceeds $500,000 reduced (but not below zero) by the sum of—
‘‘(I) the executive remuneration for such applicable taxable year, plus ‘‘(II) the portion of the deferred deduction executive remuneration for such services which was taken into account under this clause in a preceding taxable year.

In The Meantime...

While we wait for this new version of the hyperinflation--I mean Bailout Bill to pass the House on Friday... Will you just look at that nice, sustained positive trend in the US dollar index! It's almost as if... the dollar gets stronger when we don't FLOOD THE WORLD WITH $700 BILLION OF THEM!! Imagine that...

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Does Someone Who's Bleeding to Death Need a Transfusion or a Tourniquet?

I see a bailout as a blood transfusion for a patient that is bleeding to death. sure, it'll let the patient live longer, but why not stop the bleeding rather than just adding more blood?

The global economy is fucked not because we wouldn't pout 700 billion into the raging inferno to keep in burning, but because our politicians didn't have the balls in 1913, 1944, 1971, and don't have the balls now to stop the financial sector from adopting irresponsible and reckless practices as their common, everyday way of life. I don't see any bailout as a solution. I see it as more inflation... because the money is coming, essentially, from nowhere. No equal exchange of labor, just 700 billion from the central bank to continue to fuel the fire. as long as the fire continues burning, it's business as usual...

We have been operating on a completely unsustainable system since the dismantling of the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1971. Fiat currencies tend to do things like this (implode) when they are largely unregulated. But to actually fix it, what's needed is not more fiat money, but a serious amount of restraint, regulation, and hopefully an end to the commonplace irresponsible and reckless behavior of the financial sector.

Hopefully there will be a smaller bailout, because in that way the mainstream media is right--at this point we need it to survive in the short-term. But unless it's coupled with serious ass-kicking economic reform, it's just going to prolong the situation and make it even worse when the inevitable crash does come. A bailout without meaningful changes/reforms will set the stage for another bailout in a few years--this time by the IMF/World Bank.

But I don't think things are quite as bad as the Dow Jones reports would make them to be. People are still buying things (on credit even). Many companies are still profitable and still hiring. The financial sectors will feel a lot of hurt and they will pass it down through the rest of the economy and some innocent companies will likely go under... But companies that actually provide a useful service or produce a useful product will probably be OK. And the American people are quite resilient... We'll be OK too...