Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Economics, recession’ Category

The answer to the title above is simple; constant population growth equals constantly growing corporate profits. That’s not necessarily a good thing for the 99 percent.

The US economy is dominated by a Ponzi Scheme known as Wall Street. As corporate earnings rise, stock prices generally rise. If aggregate corporate profits go down, as they always must in time, then that 15,000+ value we see today with the Dow Jones Industrials can drop to 8,000 or less, as it did during the Great Recession.

Now imagine what would happen if the economy never came out of the Great Recession, like during the Great Depression. In October 1929, the Dow Jones was close to 400, up from less than 100 in 1921. The Depression hit that month, the economy entered into a sustained decline, the Dow dropped and dropped until it was less than 50 in October 1932. That’s a lot of speculative profits that were wiped out. The Dow began climbing with the election of FDR on November 8, 1932. But what if FDR didn’t win and the US continued down the same path? There’s a good chance the Dow would’ve dropped to a value of zero.

One way to avert such a calamity is to have constantly increasing population. As population grows, there are more people to feed, which means constantly growing demand for goods and services, which helps corporate profits rise, which keeps the Dow growing. The government will even feed and house tens of millions of people in order to keep demand up.

If, however, the US population was to decline, especially in the long-run, so too would the demand for goods and services. That means corporate profits would begin a long term drop. The financial markets would plummet in the long run. Paper profits that have grown over decades would vanish like smoke.

The birth rates of US citizens began to slow a few decades ago, and to compensate, your government opened the floodgates of immigration to compensate for that. Of course, there were other factors for doing this, as well. More immigrants meant a downward push on wage growth. The difference between what wages would’ve been in the absence of higher immigration and what they became with greater immigration went into the already fat wallets of the super rich via higher corporate profits, share prices and rising dividends.

This is not to suggest that immigration is always a bad thing, especially if there is a rising tide of prosperity for all. However, immigration during a time when there has been a massive redistribution of income and wealth flowing from the 99 to the 1 percent probably isn’t a good thing for the 99 percent. But it is good for Wall Street and the 1 percent, and for the reasons cited above.

If population growth continues to slow, and last year it grew only 0.7 percent, and middle class income continues to stagnate, then the current record rise in the Dow Jones Industrials suggests it is a bubble caused by redistributing income from the 99 to the 1 percent.

In other words, it is possible the current pathetic economic expansion is ambling down a road that ends at a very steep cliff. This brings us to a question.

Was the Great Recession just a blip on the road to an even greater Depression somewhere down the road a few years from now?

Read Full Post »

US Senator Elizabeth Warren introduced the Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act on May 10, 2013. She made several good points about student loans, the most depressing one being that interest rates for new subsidized student loans will increase from 3.4 to 6.8 percent on July 1, unless congress does something about it.

She noted that banks get to borrow from the Federal Reserve at 0.75 percent, the same banks that destroyed the economy. The Federal Reserve has also lent and or given out tens of trillions of dollars to the banks on behalf of rich investors, so yes we can afford to push interest rates down on student loans.

However, the banks have investors who want more and more profits, while students only invest in themselves. Student loans are purchased by Wall Street investment banks, who then slice and dice them, and sell bonds backed by the loans to rich investors. Much of the monthly loan payments made by students go directly into the pockets of investors.

Consequently, the current purpose of student loans are to redistribute income from the borrowers to rich investors. As they examine the bill, everybody in congress and on Wall Street will look at it and wonder, why would any investor buy bonds backed by such low interest rates?

So don’t expect congress to vote yes on the bill without sizable pressure from voters calling them to support it. And, of course, the corporate press will be sure to never mention that the bill exists, except perhaps in the least obvious way, like in small print on page 57, or with a five second clip on the 2am news. That way they won’t alarm the general population to act on federal legislation to their benefit and people won’t call Wall Street’s congressional representatives, such as Senator Ron Wyden and Congressman Earl Blumenauer. That way Wall Street hacks won’t complain to the editors.

Read Full Post »

Senator Elizabeth Warren has introduced a bill in which student loans will be offered at the same rate banks pay the Federal Reserve. They pay 0.75 percent, less than one percent.

“In her Senate remarks introducing The Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act, Warren bluntly states her rationale: “‘If the Federal Reserve can float trillions of dollars to large financial institution, surely they can float the Department of Education the money to fund our students, keep us competitive, and grow our middle class.’”

Naturally, the entire Republican Party and 80 percent of Democrats will oppose this bill because it’s what they do; wage war against the middle class.

Click on the link below for the full story.

elizabeth-warren-introduces-first-bill-students-should-get-educational-loans-at-same-low-rate-as-big-banks-0-75-percent

Read Full Post »

Yes, are we getting ripped off. From 2009 to 2011, the richest 8 million families (the top 7%) on average saw their wealth rise from $1.7 million to $2.5 million each. Wealth is what you own, income is money coming in. Income is what makes wealth grow, outside of say, the growth in value of an asset.

The Dow Jones just blew past 15,000, a record. How’d that happen? Easy. Income is being massively, and in many cases illegally, redistributed from the 93 percent to the 1 percent. See your-retirement-bottle-champagne-how-wall-street-fraudsters-ripped-you-again and breakdown-of-the-26-trillion-the-federal-reserve-handed-out-to-save-rich-incompetent-investors-but-who-purchase-political-power. The extra money the 1 percent receive in their rip-off scam is invested in the stock and bond markets, and it is precisely this redistribution scheme that is fueling the Dow Jones Industrials.

That’s why the rest of us, that’s 111 million families, suffered on average a decline of $6,000 each. It’s been redistributed to the 1 percent. Free trade treaties also play a role in this scam. Every year, one to three million jobs are exported from the United States to lower wage nations, according to the Federal Reserve. The difference between the old higher wages and the new lower wages are thrust into the pockets of the 1 percent via higher corporate earnings, rising dividends and soaring stock prices.

Do the math and you’ll discover that the top 7% gained a whopping $5.6 trillion in net worth (assets minus liabilities) while the rest of lost $669 billion. Their wealth went up by 28% while ours went down by 4 percent.

It’s as if the entire economic recovery is going into the pockets of the rich because it is. It’s no accident, it’s been carefully planned, whether it’s shipping jobs overseas, or giving bailouts to the 1 percent via the government and the Federal Reserve.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

How would you feel if a bunch thugs stole your money in broad daylight, were caught red-handed, and they were immune from the law, could not be convicted, and they got to keep your money?

Guess who recently did that to you? The banksters! People are calling it the LIBOR scandal. Sixteen banks, like Citibank and Bank of America, decided not to compete with each other, which is normal business for them. But this time they got caught setting their interest rates at higher levels than if they’d been competing, which coincidentally, is illegal.

This was a massive income redistribution scam from the 99 to the 1 percent. We’re talking about hundreds of billions of dollars that was stolen by collusion from the 99 percent. Did you know that the 1 percent have gained $5.6 Trillion in this supposed economic recovery, while the rest of us have lost $669 billion?
That’s because most of their gains have been stolen from us.

The US Justice Department has decided the banks are too big to go after, even though they were caught months ago. This really means the banks have been handing out a ton of money to politicians to not go after them; they’ve been handing out the money they stole from us so that the political hacks such as Barack Obama and Eric Holder stand up for the right of the banks (which are tools of the 1 percent) to rip off every one else.

It’s time to end the madness of corruption. Let’s begin to form a broad alliance that can take back our government from thieves and liars, like Wall Street’s Senator Ron Wyden and his buddy, Wall Street Congressman Paul Ryan.

That’s what the Democratic and Republican parties stand for. Click on the link below for the full story.

your-retirement-bottle-champagne-how-wall-street-fraudsters-ripped-you-again

Read Full Post »

This statement has been credited to “A Modest Enquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper Current,” a pamphlet written by Franklin. For more on this, check out the following link. Hidden History According to Benjamin Franklin

Read Full Post »

Each year since 2008, the U.S. has given $147.3 million to cotton farmers–in Brazil.

Shifting US tax dollars to foreign nations is one example of some of the consequences of free trade policies that redistribute income.

In 2008, Brazil argued before the World Trade Organization (WTO) that U.S. agriculture subsidies to cotton producers violated WTO agreements. Following the WTO’s secret tribunal ruling, instead of ending the subsidies or saying to hell with the WTO, Congress and the Administration agreed to pay the Brazilian cotton industry $147.3 million a year – the amount determined as the losses Brazilians incur as a result of U.S. cotton subsidies.

Now, not only are U.S. cotton farmers receiving millions in subsidies, but we are paying a $147.3 million fine to Brazil every year, year after year, instead of fixing the problem! It’s like choosing to pay a $150 parking ticket every day for your car to sit in front of a fire hydrant rather than in your own driveway.

$147.3 million is not going to solve the debt crisis, but we have better uses for this money here at home instead of Brazil. $147.3 million could be used to:

1 Reduce the deficit
2 Fund Meals on Wheels to deliver approximately 21 million meals to seniors who are struggling with mobility
3 Send up to 20,000 kids to Head Start for a year
4 Provide 26,000 Pell grants to students

The US government has been overwhelmed by a tidal wave of corruption and greed unleashed during the Reagan years. And so nothing will be done to end US taxpayer support of Brazilian cotton growers. That’s because in the corrupt climate of Washington D.C. profits are more important than people, even if such a thing isn’t in the US Constitution.

The US Constitution requires 2/3s of the US Senate vote for any treaty to become law. However, something called an Congressional-Executive Agreement has been made up and become some weird kind of “make believe” treaty. This Anti-Constitution agreement only requires majority yes votes from both houses of congress for the make believe to take effect, like the effects of a narcotic. The Congressional-Executive Agreements is clearly in violation of the US Constitution, although the Koch Brothers/Corporate wing of the US Supreme Court disagrees with this.

The secret tribunals in these treaties are also unconstitutional.

Article III Section 1. states, The judicial Power of the united States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. Section 2 continues, “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States and Treaties made, or which shall be made under their Authority….

In other words, only US courts can decide the legal issues that arise from treaties. And no free trade treaty has been passed with two-thirds votes of the US senate.

That suggests free trade treaties and their secret tribunals are illegal devices to subvert the will of 99 percent of US citizens and are used to redistribute their tax dollars, their incomes, and their political rights granted under the Constitution to the 1 percent.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,006 other followers