grinding our democracy
 (as mortally wounded as it is)
  -> *all* the way down into the dust

The mining industry does not fear the MRRT; they are continuing to expand, also as they continue to ship 83% of their obscenely fat profits o/s = the (BIG) lions' share our patrimony gone, lost to us forever.

Citizens have been assured that they will not lose from the carbon tax, but the world will lose big-time if excess CO2 emissions are not reversed ASAP.

Abbott, Hockey, Pine & Co will cripple medicare & flog off medibank, re-introduce a more savage SerfChoices and discover a 'massive budget black hole' which will 'force' = enable them to sink Aus into austerity. If Cameron is doing it to England, Merkel wants to do it to Greece, why shouldn't Abbott want to do it to Aus? He/they will; it's a 'natural' part of neoliberalism = rip the people off, and depress their conditions.

Keep dreaming, pro-Liberal 'rebels' = rabble, just like in Libya.

Yes, you will be 'free' of Labor, this will assassinate them for a generation. But like a dog chasing a car, you don't know what to do (= will have done to you), when you catch it.

After the hung-parliament election, we watched Abbott's month-long tantrum in awe, then watched him + the Libs spit about great, big, new taxes, now the desperation of the Thomson pursuit.

What do they really want; put cui bono into reverse; what is Labor doing that's sooo bad? The Libs' pressure leaves no time to govern = actually run the country; this is worse than the Murdoch-led "Get Whitlam at any price" jihad. Problem for the Libs is that their haste is unseemly, and their methodology deeply injurious...

Lib = Lab in many ways; our democracy is mortally wounded by a) the deliberate dumbing down of the (risible) 'debate,' b) the deliberate lies told by most politicians, and c) the arrogance and out of controledness of representatives once elected, see this:

"Many federal politicians who have spoken about the views of their constituents on gay marriage say they resent being told how to do their job."

Allow me to remind them that their job is to implement the will of the majority while protecting all minorities, *not* just doing as they please. That's in the democratic covenant; representatives acting independent of their electorates' collective wishes are breaking the democratic law = are being outlaws. Tumbrels.

As corrupt as both sides are, nothing quite matches the viciousness of the Libs, they and neoliberalism have far more in common that just a similar name.

Abbott's next wail: "Rinse her blood off my toga!"

Amoral political thug.


it's the oil, stupid!
 well, of course it was
  plus US hegemony, as usual via bombs

.. the pen ...

  .. is mightier ...

    .. than the sword (so they say - proof, please)

Musing, 1: I term myself a seeker of truth and an advocate for justice. I explain this in terms of inner-equilibrium; lies and injustice make me feel bad, so I try to minimise these bad feelings by pointing out the more egregious examples (come in, Sisyphus.)

Musing, 2: There is a tendency to favour 'the underdog,' it 'connects' with (M1) above. In the recent rape of Libya, Gaddafi was definitely at a disadvantage, but I favoured him for other reasons, including a) anyone opposing 'the great Satan' must be far more correct than not, b) Libya had the highest HDI in Africa and c) the Great Man-Made River ... "a network of pipes that supplies water to the Sahara Desert in Libya, from the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System fossil aquifer. It is the world's largest irrigation project."

Gaddafi built it for 'his' people; no loans, not neo-liberalised. Yet.

"Today, high oil revenues and a small population give Libya one of the highest GDPs per capita in Africa and have allowed the Libyan state to provide an extensive level of social security, particularly in the fields of housing and education."

Now, change that to "Until the US+NATO bombardment ..."


Apart from the 120 or so cruise missiles, seemingly 'hastily' fired due to Sarkozy jumping the gun, the US took a low-profile (but high-power, 'back-room' directing) part in the 2nd oily "shock'n whore" in eight years (over 5 mths = slow-motion), but the damage - so far not shown to us - is, I expect, roughly comparable. A Gaddafi spokesperson was heard, 'they smashed everything. Everything.' Enough from me, get much more here:

Middle East
Aug 26, 2011
Sweet crude of mine
By Pepe Escobar
  «Meanwhile, from Benghazi to European capitals, the dancing is to the tune of a Guns 'n Roses megahit, now rebranded Sweet Crude of Mine. France and Germany are already pressing the "NATO rebels" leadership for juicy deals, Italy starts today (Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is meeting Jalil in Milan) and the Brits and the Americans are about to join the fray.» 

Comment: Sad. Outrageous. That this tolerated is beyond me; the level of immorality of the US+NATO (F+UK et al.) and the un-protesting world is truly shocking. Words fail me.


gratuitous greed
 cretinous competition
  recipe for downright disaster

.. a crime ...

  .. is a crime ...

    .. is a crime, ad infinitum


Preamble; Balzac: Le secret des grandes fortunes sans cause apparente est un crime oublié, parce qu'il a été proprement fait.

wikiquote: The secret of great fortunes without apparent cause is a crime forgotten, for it was properly done.

Me: The secret of great fortunes without apparent cause is some cunning, undiscovered crimes.

Discussion: Although "oublié" translates as "forgotten," it can't be correct since that contradicts "secret." Same with "proprement," a properly-done crime is an *initially* successful execution; the cunning[1] comes in with the undiscovered = permanent invisibility of the exploit. Also, one could replace "is" with "may be," conceding some (tiny) allowance for luck (since 'good management' would contradict "without apparent cause").

Note: Whatever; but a crime is a crime, discovered or not. End preamble.
[update 1, update 2]


Background: When I 1st heard 'greed is good,' I nearly had an attack of the vapours: How dare they?!! Then I heard that it came from an Hollywood film, as if that might be some sort of excuse. Well, we do know that Hollywood + TV portray all possible perversions over time, and here is a quote:

  «I am not a destroyer of companies. I am a liberator of them! The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms: greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. Thank you very much.» 

Comment: That worked out well, didn't it? The USA bit, I mean.


Trigger article:

Aug 17, 2011
Ben's promises are empty
By Martin Hutchinson
  «There are two opposing positions on government spending stimulus: the Keynesian position that it stimulates economic growth generally and the Austrian position that by crowding out the private sector it substitutes less efficient for more efficient use of resources and hence retards growth.» 

Comment: A nice, illustrative summary. Another extract is needed:

  «The Keynesian theory of fiscal stimulus, under which random government spending stimulates the economy, is bolstered by one enormous hidden advantage: Keynesians designed the principal measure of economic output, gross domestic product - or GDP.
Unlike private-sector output, which is measured by what markets are actually prepared to pay for something, government output is measured purely on a cost basis, with no accounting for that output's value. Thus if a dozy government wastes $1 billion on rubbish of no value, GDP is said to be increased by $1 billion. Naturally, with that kind of "cooking the books", stimulus can appear to stimulate.
It would be grossly unfair to say that no government output had any value. Indeed the most basic functions of government, national security and the preservation of order, often have a value far in excess of their cost, as sufferers from last week's British riots have discovered.»

Comment: Now we start to see bias writ large; "random government spending," ... "if a dozy government wastes $1 billion on rubbish of no value..." There's another error here, namely a purported dollar for dollar GDP increase; this ignores the multiplier. I saw an estimate of 1.5 recently, on the low side (I learnt about 2.5), but possible if spending 'leaks' into imports (from off-shore - exactly where lots of jobs went). One more extract:

  «Nevertheless, many government functions have far less value than their cost; if this were not the case, they would already be provided by the free market, without any government intervention at all. Naturally, those government functions carried out as a result of an unplanned "stimulus" to boost an economy out of recession will tend to be less valuable than average, since if a need for them had been seen earlier they would already have been included in the annual budget.» 

Comment: As usual, fallacious arguments may contain true bits, like the bit starting with: "It would be grossly unfair" - but that is both a debating trick and a method of smuggling in more bias ("most basic;" see 'thuggish' below), then "if a need for them had been seen earlier" is outright misleading; often stimulus program-items have long languished in bottom-drawers, for the lack of budget priority.

Comment: Another attribute of the erring ideology (of the anti-government spending mob), is that they tend to condemn govt. as a whole (apart from their 'pet favourites,' like ever more thuggish police and the Pentagon's ultra-expensive toys and murdering for spoil military 'adventures,' and supporting criminal Zs.) Another also, Obama's 'stimulus' spending went mostly to bail-out the banks who caused the GFC and to supporting otherwise unsupportable entities like GM - rather than on useful infrastructure, say, whereby the hapless workers get jobs + $s they spend 100% of (multiplier), and afterwards, the country has 'something in the hand' - as with TVA, or national highway system, etc..

Backing up a bit, we see this: "crowding out the private sector it substitutes less efficient ..." - a, if not the, key argument; too bad that it too is fallacious. It's a govt. function to provide needed services that the private sector *won't* take on, and the argument is self-destroyed by the private sector's feral lust to privatise govt. entities. See Chicago's parking meters.

Swish! - Occam's razor-time.

If we date neoliberalism to Thatcher(1979+)/Reagan(1981+), she of "TINA!" and "there is no such thing as society," and he of "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem," we can see not much else but decline; a decline in the people's wages, conditions and service-deliveries, accompanied by the (mostly already) rich getting (ever more obscenely) richer. Recall that we don't do coincidences, and even if we some day might, this poor -> poorer and rich -> richer ain't one, not by a looong chalk. It may be that neoliberalism grew out of Friedman's monetarism, the 'Chicago School,' 'Harvard Boys' or any/all those & more, but wherever (the hell) it came from, what we *do not* hear much of is a) argument against it, let alone b) ways to correct its failures. Because fail it has, most spectacularly. Looks to me like most if not all the economic theories now in vogue are failing. Risk management? Sure, and there goes another stock-exchange crash. (US) house-prices? Crashing. Unemployment? Through the roof, along with medical costs, most other costs (privatised electricity, petrol, say. What was that Rupert? Iraq war = $20,- oil? Bah, and apologist/supporters of crime are considered equally guilty, via the 'accessory' mechanism.)

Another quote from Reagan: "I believe there are legitimate government functions." Bewdy; me too, mate; and those functions have to be properly funded. Problem is that government spending has become an 'easy' target; far too easy, any fool can (promise to) cut taxes, look no further than Abbott.

Swish! - Occam's razor again.

My point; fazit #1: Greed was *never* good (however as a 'driver,' it might work for some). Certainly, it is *not* anywhere near the top of the Darwinian pyramid, recall that human civilisation got its biggest boost with farming = collective, cooperative efforts. Cooperation is clearly preferable to confrontation - the latter being the only neoliberal menu item on offer to us, we the sheople. The ideal, so-called 'free' markets are as good as never free; see the "What's in it for me" voter-seduction/begging, and the myriad exceptions demanded via the lobbyocracy = corrupt political process. Our politicians lie to us, conduited and *actively assisted* by the venal MSM, incl. 'our' AusBC. Doing anything 'for profit' is a virtual guarantee of getting profit ahead of performance, they'll even tell you 'by law;' their task being to produce 'shareholder value' above all else - possibly deadly, if the for profit service is medicine. (No money or credit card? Sorry; and try not to get blood on our carpet on your way out.)

Swish! - Occam's razor, the last for now.

The calls for austerity, heard from almost every corner, are illustrating the bankruptcy of thought 'in power.' Like the old one about crims; Q: Why do they try to rob banks? A: Because that's where the money is. Which, coincidentally, is where lots of rich keep their dough. Wanna 'balanced budget?' - Tax the rich. Hard, but fair[2].

Update 110822, 08:18; PS Ah, yes. The moral aspect ... in the 1st instance, any moral condemnation, however 'well'-deserved, will bring nothing (but must be made, loud & clear), since the shadowy true rulers order mass-slaughters [Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.] and not only tolerate vile crime, they actually encourage it [Israel, etc.]; they will in turn only respond to force. Speaking of Libya, the rogue-regimes of the US (300mio), France (65mio) & England (50mio) must feel inordinately proud of themselves, having laid waste to Libya (6.5mio) in almost exactly 5 months. Well done US+NATO, a certain Reich would be more than impressed; you have 'well'-earned the next number up (=4th) ...


Update 110822, 15:21; PPS I had to do a bit on Libya this morning, as my entry into mourning on Libya's behalf. Wiki: "Libya had the highest HDI in Africa;" since the UN+NATO destroyed Gaddafi (plus his society) for *nothing but $s*, the 'Libyan in the street' may expect some 'slight' fall in general living standards. Oh! Recall Thatcher: "... there is no such thing as society" - especially after such a "shock'n whore;" could be likened to shooting camels from a helicopter - but here it was hi-tech NATO against relatively peaceful, after the US 120 cruise missile assault, essentially unarmed Arabs.


But I should get back to the greed/crime theme; switching to another atimes article's concluding remarks:

  «Wall Street was the enabler, but Main Street was the addict. Americans stopped saving as long as home prices rose; when home prices started to fall, they started saving again.
That is why the national narrative that Westen proposes is ill-informed, innumerate, vituperous, malicious and false. American households levered a $6 trillion net inflow of foreign savings during the decade 1998 through 2007 into a bubble that benefited them far more than it did Wall Street. The impact of the bubble on the household balance sheet exceeds the growth in real-estate assets, moreover, because most small business expansion followed the housing bubble.
Americans, as I argued on August 2 (The collapse of America's middle class Asia Times Online, August 2) must adapted to a technology-driven global economy, after a decade and a half of riding the crest of the savings tsunami that flooded American markets during the bubble years.»

Comment: Phew! Strong words (repeat; "ill-informed, innumerate, vituperous, malicious and false"); talk about bad manners, then blaming the victim. The theme morphs from the govt. planning (more the lack of, or outright error of) to the sheople, their relationship to business, the economy & and here, house-prices. The people must adapt (as if they had some choice), the people are to be *blamed* for housing inflation, blah, blah. Spengler also blames 'cheap imported $s,' causing another near-attack of the vapours. So-called 'cheap imported $s' are also implicated in Aus, but there is a vast difference; for the US they are printed $s being pushed back (nothing much else to do with them), in Aus they are sought after. In both cases, the interest leaves the country, but single-dwelling purchasers cannot benefit (until the final cash-out, perhaps). In the US 'no-doc' (=toxic) loans were a big factor, in Aus it was primarily Howard/Costello's ½CGT, plus the exhortation to 'create wealth.'

Swish! - Occam's still around.

My point; fazit #2: I've no doubt at all, that the 'Wall St. Wizards' think their greed is justified, even inside the law - or at the very least, know that there are no cops on their tail. Law is a construct anyway, and with the law-makers in Wall St.'s pockets, the law can be anything they want it to be. No one talks about justice or morals (except me'n me mates perhaps); but the simple fact is that the rich, mostly already so, just can't get enough, and what they're grabbing is from us, we the sheople (zero-sum 'game').



[1] cunning  -adj. (-er, -est) 1 deceitful, clever, or crafty. 2 ingenious (cunning device). ... cunningly adv. [Old Norse: related to *can1] [POD]

[2] fair1  -adj. 1 just, equitable; in accordance with the rules. [ibid.] 


capitalism's showcase
 the stock exchange
  is a gambling-den

.. infested ...

  .. by speculators ...

    .. and outright swindlers

Thesis/Subtitle: Total failure of our so-called 'leadership' & economic system..
[update 1, update 2 (a bewdy).]


Trigger article:

Shares resume slide on US, Europe financial fears
Online business reporter Michael Janda
Updated August 19, 2011 18:59:14
  «More than $40 billion was wiped off the value of the market - the 3.5 per cent sell-off driven by a combination of weak US economic data and initial moves by Germany and France to introduce a financial transactions tax.
The net result of overnight action was a widespread return to the view that the US and Europe would double-dip into recession.
ANZ posted $4.2 billion in underlying profits for the nine months to June, a rise of 16 per cent on the previous year, but its profit growth had slowed in the third quarter due to consumer caution about borrowing.
ANZ's shares slipped 4.5 per cent to $19.50, while its main rivals posted falls between 2.9 and 3.6 per cent.»

Comment 1: Oh, dear! 'The market' is crashing - again? No, still.

Comment 2: Note "introduce a financial transactions tax;" it's always amused me that 'the pundits' offer some reason for 'market' movements - as if they could divine the mood of the (investor/speculator) masses (imagine eye-shades, smoky back-rooms), but this one additionally illustrates a propaganda technique, namely pointing the finger at something they don't like, laying the ground-work: “Well, just proposing xx caused a mini-market-melt-down, so we'd better not have any of that!”

Comment 3: The perverse reaction (= falling stock price) resulting from a +ve report (namely a 16% profit-rise as compared to last year) - illustrates the *irrationality* of the (investor/speculator) 'players.'


It gets worse. The 'transactions tax' is aimed largely at computer-trading, whereby computer programs written by the self-termed 'masters of the financial universe' monitor 'the market' (sometimes by outright illegal means, like seeing a big buy/sell order before execution, then trading in advance = insider-trading), exploiting any and all 'market' movements (sometimes quite small), with the clear intention of capitalising on those movements - and, note, thus 'skimming' any potential profit from more conventional trades. So far, (not) so good.

Then we get a few more true nasties, namely short-selling (including the 'naked' variety), and various 'derivatives' - like the CFDs I mentioned here. These nasties are more or less bets, noting that even if 'minimal,' a bet is still a bet = gambling.

More on betting; they say on the one hand, that the EU is coming under pressure, and on the other that speculators are active, not quite making the connection, namely that speculators are gambling against EU countries (PIIGS), and thus the EU itself - actually making an EU-crash more likely. What I don't know and can't imagine, is who these speculators are making their bets with; i.e. who are the mugs taking on the losing side of the bets?

Actually, we can sometimes see such mugs at work; both the Japanese & Swiss 'authorities' have made recent steps to 'protect' their currencies, in direct contradiction of so-called 'free market' theory, and especially in the Swiss case, an impossible task - 7mio Swiss trying to 'fight' the speculators from 300mio US & 500mio EU? Hopeless.

A neoliberal 'article of faith' is that 'the market' is all-knowing; apart from being an obvious absurdity on its face, the irrationality mentioned above disproves it. In like manner, most of neoliberalism can be disproved - yet our so-called 'leadership' continues to push the erring neoliberal ideology upon us, we the long-suffering sheople.

It only takes a moment's reflection on the growing numbers of unemployed, the similarly growing numbers in poverty, and the growing numbers lacking health-insurance (all especially so in the US), the general fear almost everywhere (keywords jobs! Jobs! Jobs!), the deliberately caused house-price inflation (Howard/Costello's ½CGT, say) - to see that since Thatcher/Reagan, things have been getting seriously buggered.


It gets even worse. The lessons learnt from 1929++, the measures developed to recover from the resulting depression, and the measures developed to prevent a recurrence of both have *deliberately* been ignored, negated and/or dismantled.

The stock market and associated banksters, plus a few other hangers-on (insurance, real-estate manipulators) form what's called the FIRE-sector. It is this sector which is *deliberately* destroying our economy, via depredations such as globalisation (= wage depression/job emigration), in addition to their erring neoliberal ideology (privatisations, down-sizing, leaning&meaning) and other terms like 'supply-side' and 'economic rationalism.' Starting sometime before/around/with Thatcher/Reagan, the rich via their agents have pushed the economy further towards a cliff, making life hell for the average wo/man in the street. All deliberate, all planned - with the connivance and active assistance of our so-called political 'leadership' - from both of the mainly two-party 'sides,' noting that bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic. In fact, these people doing us wrong, all mentioned in this paragraph - are our, we the sheople's enemies.
Update 110820, 10:51; PS It's not all doom & gloom; some 'people of substance' can see what's wrong, and offer ways out. But 1st, a little aside: There are two words one should be reluctant to deploy, namely 'unbelievable' and 'unacceptable.' Although it may be 'scarcely believable' that such villainy as neoliberalism could be forced upon us by our so-called 'leaders' = 'representatives,' it is nevertheless happening - and besides, believing is defined as 'accepting in the absence of evidence.' Although having neoliberalism forced upon us is definitely not acceptable, it's up to us, we the people to stop it. Sooo, here is a little reading-list containing both back-up for what I have written above (= substantiation), and practical suggestions to 'improve' the world's economic performance. To pre-empt a bit, allow me to repeat one of my 'moral planks,' namely 'do no harm,' and remind that we're all in this together; if a greedy minority were to destroy our world's comfortable life-support system, it's down the tor-let for us all. I locate the error to before/around/with Thatcher/Reagan; apart from "TINA!" (but there always was and still is), Thatcher said: "... there is no such thing as society" (but there is, ditto). Too many 'followed' Thatcher/Reagan, it's a big part of why we're in such a mess. And note that when the mess comes home to roost (recent London riots, say), the reaction from Cameron is the same as all along from our rulers, namely more and vicious repression - again, obviously wrong. The list, publ-time-ordered:

September 6, 2009
How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?
  «When it comes to the all-too-human problem of recessions and depressions, economists need to abandon the neat but wrong solution of assuming that everyone is rational and markets work perfectly.» 

Comment: Plus, factor in greed and fraud, and note that if criminals can get away with theft, they will = restore proper regulation, and totally ostracise all immorality.

America for Sale: An Exclusive Excerpt from Matt Taibbi’s New Book on the Economic Meltdown
  «Our cash-strapped country is auctioning off its highways, ports and even parking meters, finding eager buyers ...» 

Comment: "Cash-strapped" primarily because of tax-cuts, and those mainly off the rich. Any idiot can perform or promise tax-cuts - as Abbott shows us, ad nauseam. The problem is that there are *required* services which cannot be cut; *someone* (= the 'neoliberal' user, as opposed to the community) has to pay, which ignores egalitarian processes, extra unemployment and the introduced interest and gross management payouts; privatise to 'for profit' and expect profit before performance, possibly 'deadly' when it's medicine.

Why Banks Aren't Lending: The Silent Liquidity Squeeze
Friday 15 July 2011
  «Alone among states, North Dakota had the wherewithal to keep credit moving to small businesses when they needed it most. BND's business lending actually grew from 2007 to 2009 (the tightest months of the credit crisis) by 35 percent.» 

Comment: Truly intriguing; fiat $s are 'printed' at no cost but are loaned out at interest; if the state collects that interest it can use it to pay for *required* services and simultaneously provide the $s for the borrowers to pay their interest-bill, a 'balanced' circulation is possible and an inflation-rate of *zero* targeted, at the same time as lightening the tax 'burden.' May sound like magic, but works very well, for the fortunate North Dakotans. Yes, this implies nationalising the banks - and defeating rogue banksters' depredations at a stroke. No bad thing.

The Market Has Spoken: Austerity Is Bad for Business
by Ellen Brown
August 6, 2011
  «The budget crisis is an artificial one, and the current “solution” will only guarantee a deeper recession and more widespread suffering. Rather than obsessing over deficits and debt, the government needs to turn its focus to jobs, sales and quality of life.» 

Comment: The smart-arse US (plus snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on) are attempting to defeat some of the immutable laws of the universe, such is their hubris. Of course, it's a fools' errand, but they have the guns - which implies armed theft; pretty close, and see my 'the world's worst terrorists.' Economically, they have in their sights welfare $s = socialism, treated as communism = a disease (in their minds, and as one 'economic argument' they point to Stalin's and/or Pol Pot's murdering and no, that makes no sense at all); other targets are Marx, Fordism & JMK = Keynesian theories. Austerity is not just bad for business, it is guaranteed to make things far, far worse - and is a condemnation of those who are trying to force it, being IMF, the target's own politicians or externals like Merkel & Sakozy et al.. The only viable countervailing solution to austerity may be tumbrels for the push-perpetrators.

Economic Hubris - Fixing the economy: We got it wrong
by Prof. James K. Galbraith
August 15, 2011
  «To go further, let's admit that our problem is not budget deficits or public debt — not now and not later. Let's agree that cutting Social Security and Medicare — inflicting pointless pain on the elderly — will not help. Let's build a new financial system to serve public purpose and private business. And let's start to act on our actual needs and problems: jobs, foreclosures, public investments, energy security and climate change.» 

Comment: Sound words.

August 19 - 21, 2011
Guard-Dogs for the Banks
The Case Against Rating Agencies
  «To acquiescence in such economically destructive financial behavior is the opposite of fiscal responsibility. Cutting federal taxes and Social Security payments to obtain a more positive S&P “opinion” would give banks an ability to “pull the plug” and force privatization and anti-labor austerity plans by refraining from rolling over the U.S. debt – and cutting taxes Tea-Party style rather than funding spending by taxation on a pay-as-you-go-basis.» 

Comment: As usual; one should read all of the citations through - I did; not all may be pertinent and/or correct - but it's better than nothing, and nothing would be far better than neoliberalism - which is killing our economies, for all except the rich, super-rich & the obscenely rich.

The obvious place to start is to tax those rich back to reality, and restore social justice - even if that gets up the greedies' collective nose & bugger Reagan, Thatcher and all such neoliberal tyrants.

Update 110820, 14:21; PPS Examine this 'just in' one, at your leisure:

Titanic Battle or Insider Trading?
The S&P Downgrade and the Bilderbergers: All Part of the Plan?
by Ellen Brown
August 18, 2011
  «The latest bet was made on July 21 on trades of 5,370 ten-year Treasury futures and 3,100 Treasury bond futures, reported ETF Daily News.
Now the investor’s gamble seems to have paid off after Standard and Poor’s issued a credit rating downgrade from AAA to AA+ last Friday.
Whoever it is stands to earn a 1,000 per cent return on their money, with the expectation that interest rates will be going up after the downgrade.
The Securities Exchange Commission announced on August 8 that it is investigating the downgrade. According to the Financial Times, the move is part of a preliminary examination into potential insider trading.
Whatever can be said about the first two weeks of August, their market action was unprecedented, unnatural, and bears close observation.»

Comment: Have to laugh; includes/extends themes above + here, here, here & here. Note the word "bet," and the possible return; again one poses the Q: Who takes up the losing side of such bets, why, and in this case, how can they possibly pay up? Tip: Never gamble, if you can't afford to lose.

After you've read it all, make you go 'hmmm?'


the world's worst terrorists
 mostly infest the middle east
  as aggressive invaders, murdering for spoil

 .. Afghanistan - pipelines ...

  .. Iraq, Libya - oil ...

    .. Israel - soil

Thesis/Subtitle: If the boot fits, wear it.


The definitions of invade[1] and aggression[2] could not be clearer; IF some armed entity crosses a border inbound and proceeds to plunder, pillage, ransack, loot etc. the hapless target country, THEN there is neither excuse nor other words for it, it's criminal on the Nuremberg scale.

It's what the Zionists did and are still doing to Palestine following UNGA181; latest after Plan Dalet and the Deir Yassin massacre, the world community should have intervened and banished the aggressively invading Zionists back to whence they came. Elementary justice demands that be done.

It's what the US plus sycophants did and are still doing to Afghanistan following 9/11 (itself a whole topic of its own; three towers can *not* fall unassisted - no, not jet-planes, but pre-planted explosives); the US intent was even pre-publicised: 'Carpet of gold or bombs!'

It's what the US plus sycophants UK + Aus et al. did and are still doing to Iraq following a lying 'WMD' propaganda campaign.

It's what the US plus NATO sycophants F + UK et al. did and are still doing to Libya following an half-arsed 'revolution' and a lying 'protect civilians' propaganda campaign.

Fazit: There is no effective international law - the proof is obvious.

There are only smash and grab criminals (US, Z rogue regimes plus snivelling quisling sycophants) murdering for spoil.

The big question is Q: Why is this tolerated?

Update 110820, 08:15; PS Israeli terrorism did not end on Nakba Day, but has been relatively constant since the alien invading Zionists 'invented' modern terrorism; see outrages like King David Hotel bombing (91 people were killed and 46 were injured) and USS Liberty (killed 34 and wounded more than 170 crew members). Today we hear on our morning radio news bulletin that the IDF is performing revenge attacks on the hapless ELO/Os trapped in the open-air prison that is Gaza. The Zs are a primitive bunch, self-proclaimed victims of persecution who have now completely assumed the mantle of their persecutors; they have transformed themselves from victims to perpetrators of evil. What one can do is a total BDS against Israel, and it would not harm to inform any/all Js of your acquaintance that IL behaviour is depravedly criminal, and (repeat) that the aggressively invading Zionists and descendants should leave Palestine to return to whence they came, and revest all improperly alienated land & property = *all* of IL. That the UN, US, UK et al. do not terminate IL criminality and grant justice to IL's victims is a mark of utter corruption.




[1] invade  v. (-ding) (often absol.) 1 enter (a country etc.) under arms to control or subdue it. 2 swarm into. 3 (of a disease) attack. 4 encroach upon (a person's rights, esp. privacy).  invader n. [Latin vado vas- go] [POD]

[2] aggression  n. 1 unprovoked attacking or attack. 2 hostile or destructive behaviour. [Latin gradior gress- walk] [ibid.]


'making' $s
 sounds good
  like turning lead into gold

.. investing ...

  .. or gambling ...

    .. with your savings

Thesis/Subtitle: Money doesn't grow on trees - does it?


Trigger article:

ASIC seeks more disclosure on CFDs
Finance reporter Alicia Barry
Updated August 12, 2011 15:54:25
  «The corporate regulator is cracking down on providers of complex financial products called 'contracts for difference'.
CFDs, as they are known, allow investors to effectively bet on the price movement of a financial asset, without owning a share of that asset.
On a separate issue of financial market control, the corporate regulator says its not going to follow Europe's lead and ban short selling to reduce market volatility.
Short selling allows investors to effectively make bets on the price of stocks falling.»

Comment 1: Note the keyword: "Bet" = risk a sum of money on the result of a race, contest, etc. [POD]

Comment 2: 'Short selling' is where an 'investor' borrows a stock from someone then sells it to some 3rd, in the 'hope' (expectation?) that the price will fall, so the investor can buy the stock back and return it, pocketing the difference (less the cost of the borrowing, typically the interest on the 'value' of the borrowed stock, but as low as the interest on the deposit made with the original owner, if that owner allows 'deposit only' borrowing, aka a sort of 'leveraging.') The risk the investor takes is if the stock goes up; the hoped-for profit turns to loss, again the difference in price, plus the borrowing-costs. Another name for 'short selling' is speculation. It helps the speculator, of course, if the fall in price is assured = no risk! (Like insider-trading, say.) No discussion here of where any 'profit' might came from, i.e. who loses.

The next step is 'naked short selling,' whereby the borrowing is omitted and what's exchanged is nothing but a promise to deliver some 'asset;' if the turn-around is fast enough, no actual asset is needed. Naked short selling looks like CFDs and probably is not just 'like' but actually is; note that one of the ways to bamboozle people is to give some shonky racket a fancy, complicated name.

Observation 1: This story tells us that the ASIC allows gambling on the stock exchange.

Observation 2: This story also tells us, based on the timing, that gambling had a non-trivial part in the latest stock exchange crash; not stated is if gambling was all or part of the cause, or 'merely' all or part side-effect.

Observation 3: Gambling is deliberate exposure to risk; not something that I wish to have associated with my savings = part of our family's life support system.


More? - CFDs are 'derivatives,' not 'real' = physical things, but 'things based on things,' i.e. derived, hence the name. Easy? Well, the next step is to consider not just derivatives, but the 'money' used to trade them, as also 'not real' therefore virtual, and the fact that total derivative trading is estimated at some figure like 500Trio = orders of magnitude more than the GDP of the entire world, then this might explain why 'the Fed' stopped publishing the M3 statistic; it was becoming 'polluted' with some of these 'virtual $s.'

A big part of the recent GFC were 'derivatives gone wrong,' and one part-solution was the bank bailouts; those plus other 'fiddles' (the QEs, say, but more and not so visible) - are reputed to have 'pumped' something in the order of 15Trio into 'the financial system,' effectively replacing lost bets made largely in virtual $s - by 'real' $s, putting real in quotes because the Fed merely created the 15Trio on a computer keyboard = conjured it out of thin air. But recall that $s are fungible, which means that it is hard-to-impossible to discern between real $s & virtual $s.

Side note: With all these $Trios floating around, it's no wonder that the stock exchange goes mostly up. Think of unending supplies of 'funny money,' then think how hard you have to work, and how even harder it is to save for your non-working future.

Recently I used the term 'PPT' without explaining it; it stands for 'Presidential Plunge Team,' and means some shadowy US agency which can act as 'buyer of last resort' in an attempt to halt big slides on the stock exchange. Note that they don't even have to have any real $s, they can just keep buying, then selling again on the way up. IF it goes up, that is; Murphy tells us that if something can happen THEN it eventually will = one day, the crashing stock exchange simply won't recover, no matter how it's 'goosed.'


uk riots
 1984 vs.
  clockwork orange

.. what do ...

  .. each have ...

    .. in common?

A: Dystopian societies largely caused by oppressive governments[1,2].


Yes, rioting = berserking; smash and grabbing, etc. are criminal.

Yes, outrageous; hear the calls for 'tough measures,' and the cynical politicians' responses, and their (weak) excuses.

But #1: Rioting = berserking; smash and grabbing, etc. are *exactly* what the US, UK, Aus etc. did to Iraq, are now doing to Libya.

Sauce for the goose.

But #2: I read a comment:

  « ... The majority of people I have talked to in the streets (shopkeepers, small businessowners, waiters and cab drivers) point unequivocally to the causes being the rioters' overinflated sense of entitlement mixed with a complete lack of respect for others and a jeering contempt for authority, especially the police, who have been crippled and neutered by political correctness and a fear of offending the scores of competing minority groups.» 

IMHO: Too much, too slick; obviously a propagandist/pro-oppression apologist-troll at 'work.'

Whatever the rioters' motives are, the riots themselves are proof of the UK government's total failure.

A long time ago, possibly before Thatcher but definitely since and including her, governments - plural, at least the regimes in US, UK, Aus and others, all regimes which ape the hideous, erring neoliberal ideology, such governments *chose* to oppose the people's interests, and things will only get worse until these tyrants are removed.

A proper "of, by, for the people etc." democracy requires at least these three; 1) an informed & engaged electorate, 2) full & free info-flows, and 3) a wide range of honest candidates who, if/when elected, represent the electorate by implementing the will of the majority, protecting any minorities. Our, i.e. US, UK, Aus and other such 'pretend democracy' rogue-regimes, fail all three. Deliberately dumbed-down citizens, distracted by trivia & disinformation on TV, corrupt & venal MSM (did anyone mention Murdoch?), and most representatives sell-out to the highest bidder, usually corporations but worst-case, the "Israel Lobby."

It gets worse. The 'democratic covenant' has been and is being deliberately violated; under such circumstances any laws a corrupt regime attempts to promulgate are invalid. Here, consider the 'war on drugs.' What any citizen chooses to imbibe in privacy is none of any 3rd party's business, consumption of drugs can only harm the user (see Abbott's support of 'big tobacco'), and there are plenty of laws against any 'drug-taker' side effects - just as there are plenty of laws against rioting.

It has already been alleged elsewhere, that the rioting is a result of cutting social spending; that's only a minor, if true, part.

It is the job of governments to arrange and run society, it's what they are there for.

Repeat: Whatever the rioters' motives are, the riots themselves are proof of the UK government's total failure - to do what they are there for; and the riots are just the merest sampling of the unhappy populace (those not dozing, sated on take-out/home-delivered pizza, before their flickering flat/wide TVs, that is.)

Since TINA-Thatcher at least, governments have worked for and on behalf of those with the most $s, namely the rich and the corporations (big end of town), and have, wherever possible, cut spending, reduced services both societal (medical, welfare, education) & infrastructure (privatisations), so much so that governments have become - made themselves - the public's enemy.

Governments know all about this, because they are doing it all on purpose. It also explains why the police = the enforcers, are being conspicuously militarised.



[1] Dystopian societies feature different kinds of repressive social control systems, various forms of active and passive coercion. [wiki]

[2] oppress v. 1 keep in subservience. 2 govern or treat cruelly. 3 weigh down (with cares or unhappiness).  oppression n. oppressor n. [Latin: related to *press1] [POD.]


borderline miraculous

.. loaves ...

  .. and ...

    .. fishes, sort of


'The market' (= global stock markets, emphasise 's') has recovered, seemingly everywhere synchronised, reportedly based on a *non*-event, namely that 'the Fed' has committed to *not* changing its %-rate regime, and *not* embarking on a QE3 = printing ever more $s.

I've often suspected that the stock market is hardly more than a casino, and that reports attempting to explain its ups and downs were largely invented. Ho, hum; what about this spectacular 'market' recovery?

Even if it was a herd phenomenon, how did the herd synchronise?

Were the squillions of individual 'investors' (= punters) all just sitting around listening to their trannies, and then the signal of the Fed's non-event come through, and they all flipped from their panic/funk-sell mood into rabid buyers?

Mind you, optimism is under a bit of stress lately, due to lower than expected GDP growth, lower than expected employment = lower than expected demand, etc., but since the corporations are reporting profit growth and the wealthy are getting visibly even more wealthy, globalisation + neoliberalism are reducing the wages share by design (proof = otherwise the corporations wouldn't be doing it), it cant be too many 'workers' stimulating the stock market, or even able to buy much beyond basic food.

In the middle of this doom & gloom scenario, with stock-prices falling as much as 5% or so per day - suddenly a non-event triggers a buying spree everywhere. Talk about irrational exuberance.

Beats me. But then, I'm not a punter. 



'Trigger' article:

'No evidence' London man fired on police in riots catalyst
Updated August 10, 2011 04:46:46
  «"At this stage there is no evidence that the handgun found at the scene was fired during the incident," said the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) in an update on last Thursday's fatal shooting in Tottenham, north London.
Reports initially suggested Mr Duggan had shot at police.
The IPCC said that two shots were fired by one firearms officer, and a post-mortem examination revealed that Mr Duggan received a gunshot wound to the chest, which killed him, as well as a second gunshot wound to his right bicep.
A bullet was found lodged in one of the police officers' radios and a non-police issue handgun was also recovered from the scene.
Ballistics tests have now revealed that the bullet lodged in the radio was police issue, "and, whilst it is still subject to DNA analysis, it is consistent with having been fired from a gun used by the police.
The handgun found at the scene was a converted an illegal pistol, but it was not used in the incident, the tests also reveal. Further examination is being carried out.»


{Spectacular share rally on stimulus speculation
Online business reporter Michael Janda
Posted August 09, 2011 17:02:44 | Updated August 09, 2011 20:37:32

The Australian share market and dollar staged spectacular turnarounds on speculation of more US stimulus.

Topics:business-economics-and-finance, markets, money-and-monetary-policy, international-financial-crisis, currency, stockmarket, futures, australia, united-states, asia}

The 'market' suddenly 'reversed' just after lunch ("well after noon") - from >-5%, ending +1%.

IF magic THEN one might suspect of the criminal type,

 .. perhaps a local version of the PPT ...

 .. or merely multiple G&Ts.

Nah, it was Clancy:

"And, Clancy, you must wheel them, try and wheel them to the right."

Clancy: "Sorry, mate - any further right, they're over the cliff..."

So they all turned left, and were saved.

We will do everything to restore order: Cameron
 snipers on the roof, tanks in the streets
  artillery pieces being positioned ..

.. to fire on the citizenry ...

  .. "of all skin colours;" ...

    .. no Jihadis, please - we're English


30-40 years of - primarily abuse and neglect - dismantling social programs, letting speculators rip (house prices through the roof, rents closely following); Thatcher's TINA followed by Blair's class & justice treachery (not to mention war crimes, Cameron now also 'on board'), neoliberalism destroying whatever industry the poor poms could manage (recall Jaguar cars being sold with a one-button mobile-phone as 'cost-free' accessory? Push that button; tow-truck should arrive 'sometime after the boys finish lunch at the pub?')

England will now get a 'make-over;' it will finally resemble N. Ireland during the 'troubles' (caused primarily by the aggressive English invasion of the sovereign territory of the lovable potato-famine punished Paddies.)

The 'final solution' for apprehended miscreants will be transportation - the next 'asylum seeker' flood.

Update 14:29; It gets worse; try this:

  «"Let me completely condemn these sickening scenes; scenes of looting, scenes of vandalism, scenes of thieving, scenes of people attacking police, of people even attacking firefighters.
"This is criminality pure and simple and it has to be confronted...»

Comment: Cameron is talking about riots; one imagines triggered by some perceived injustice(s). What about the economic-crimes Thatcher, Blair and now Cameron don't merely permit, but actively encourage? More widely, the Anglo/Judaic regimes - there is neither difference nor separation between the US, UK, Aus & IL - have laid waste to *our*, we the people's civilisation, going back to the Greeks and forward through, now the neoliberal destruction of, the Enlightenment.

Yet where are those who will condemn, let alone bring to justice, our 'noble-lying' tyrants?


erring ideology
 cost push, demand pull
  takes two to tango: the tyrant and the snivelling quislings

.. bad things are happening ...

  .. because good people ...

    .. don't speak up

Thesis/Subtitle: Effective countervailing power - where is it?

Preamble: As a friend says: "It is not simple;" but I know of no problem that cannot be broken down into ever-smaller parts until you get to the elementary 'binary-cut' situation, in fact that's exactly what digital computing is all about. Yesterday I wrote of one example, namely one form of either/or; here's another: Either most people are criminal or they're not. I prefer the latter, but the former are in control. Why that, and who will rid of us of these vile tyrants?


Musing: 'Narratives' are fake histories or actual plots; criminals use narratives to coordinate the lies we are continually being swamped with. Today is the 9th of August, 66 years since the 2nd atomic bomb was dropped on a mainly civilian target in Japan (Don't agree? Then you may try this.) The twin crimes against humanity, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki plus the day before Nakba Day are days of wicked infamy, as 'local maxima' these have few peers.


Article 1:

Obama says US is still a AAA country
Updated August 09, 2011 05:04:22
  «"Markets will rise and fall, but this is the United States of America. No matter what some agency may say, we have always been and always will be a triple-A country," Mr Obama said.» 

Comment: Obama sounded like Muhammad Ali: "Ah am the greatest!"

You try it: 'There is Amerika - the greatest!'

Answer: Perhaps. But greatest what?

Article 2:

Unesco chief criticises NATO attack on Libya broadcaster
Aug 8, 2011, 18:10 GMT
  «According to Unesco, three media workers were killed and 21 were injured in the July 30 attack on the Libyan broadcast facility.
The NATO military alliance justified the attack on the basis of protecting civilian population. The action against the pro-Gaddafi satellite television, NATO said, was a means of preventing the intimidation of the Libyan population and calls for violence against civilians.»

Comment 1: How odd is it, that the (corrupt & venal) MSM is not covering this story?

Comment 2: I mentioned *hearing* this story the other day, via a taxpayer-funded broadcaster; I found no transcript at the time. The lady-newsreader looked only slightly uncomfortable, before the scene-shift.

Comment 3: The major problem here is, of course, that the US/NATO (mainly F + UK, but DK, N & other 'rabble') - are out of all civilised control and are aggressively attacking (innocent) 3rd parties, mainly Arab/Muslim, at will.


My theme here is erring ideology, and the criminals forcing this disaster upon us. The disaster is doubled; war (aka geo-politics) and theft (aka economics, mainly neoliberal). The (mainly US) warmongers risibly claim to be "Making the world safe for democracy," and the (mainly US) economists + politicians claim TINA = "There is no alternative!" - but both claims are 101% bogus - as any *clear thinker* may see, assuming any such take the trouble to look.

I should not need to cite proof, but: on war/disasters, nearly 1000 US bases spread around the world, aggressive attacks becoming even more numerous (from Vietnam to Libya, a looong & dirty list), the Zionist armed theft of Palestine; on economics/disasters, neoliberalism almost everywhere; some forced by the IMF (Perkins' "Economic Hit Man"), some *voluntary*(!!?) (Aus, say, by *both* Lib & Lab; bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic), notably currently the debt-crises in USA, EU and probably almost anywhere else you care to look. As examples of economic chaos, The USA (as usual; world 'leader'), is hard to beat, with (my quick estimates from recall), 25mio un- or under-employed, 40mio without health insurance (most expensive, least cost-effective system in the world), and a similar 40mio on food-stamps.

I'll say it again: No more wars for spoil; *all* foreign-deployed forces to retire back to behind their own domestic borders, and *all* aggressively invading, land-thieving Zs (plus descendants & dependants) to return to whence they came. On economics, dump the pure-greed, rip-off voodoo, get back to civilised & enlightened JMK & JKG.

Article 3:

Bringing on the "Obama Recession" by Forgetting the Lessons of Keynes and FDR
Friday 5 August 2011
by: David Woolner
  «It is sad to think that history may be repeating itself. But the apparent decision of this administration to embrace cuts over spending may soon lead the President down the same path that FDR took in 1937. Only this time the “Obama recession” of 2011-2012 will most likely cost the current president his job.» 

Comment; Q: Who cares if Obama loses his job? He can be number 25mio+1. But note that voting someone out is almost perfectly useless, after they've done the damage... (and/but, it was far past time that Howard (so ignominiously) went; what took the mugs so long? That Abbott is now polling well shows no lessons whatsoever learnt, it's one reason and proof of why I write 'dumbed-down sheople.')

Comment 1: Of course, it's not just 'this administration' or even 'this Congress;' it's the multitude of economic berserkers running under the foul neoliberal flag.

Comment 2: It has been clear from the beginning, that down-sizing, lean&meaning, off-shoring, out-sourcing etc. was only ever going to lead to tears, and you can imagine the utter horror of any worker when the MBA-consultants turn up with their clip-boards to do their dirty neoliberal 'work' of destroying once-viable enterprises & teams of once happy workers. Austerity, like mass un- and under-employment, many in 'scraping the barrel' service jobs - all lower wages (the plan) and thus demand, which 1st leads to and then accelerates the downward spiral. Which is, by and large, where the US, 'the West' plus others are now. The wreckage left by 30-40 years of erring ideology = neoliberal destruction is visible - to those who bother to look.


It's all so screamingly obvious; if I can see it (basically a casual observer), what of the better informed and educated? Why do world so-called 'leaders' outside the US - like Merkel, say, accept the hideous 'perfect' storm of unjust resource-war & rip-off economic disaster? Are they all coerced and/or intimidated (snivelling quislings) - or do they actually agree (criminals) that their populations be devastated?

But few to no one listens.

I cannot accept that the criminals are the majority.

It's why I implore; where is the effective countervailing power?


binary cuts
 à la Occam's razor
  dump the deficit distraction

Cut any object (with one swish! of Occam's razor, say), one gets two pieces = a binary cut, i.e. either/or.

Example of either/or: Either properly fix the idiot political/economic system or crash the planet, financially and environmentally.

I suspect a terminology ('framing') problem; to cut a deficit (as both Repuglicans & Dummocrats say, also Libs/Labs; bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic), one must reduce social spending; since one cannot possibly reduce US military spending (the US would have to stop murdering for spoil = oil, and the Zs ditto for soil), so they have to cut 'entitlements' = more or less required social spending = medical/dental (alternative = preventable illness, disease & loss of teeth or whole lives), income support (alternative = preventable 'malnutrition' = cat-food or starvation), education (alternative = preventable ignorance = dumbed-down idiocy), safety regulation (alternative = preventable accidents), financial regulation (alternative = preventable GFCs), etc..

We've had 30-40 years of voodoo economics = supply-side, economic rationalism, neoliberalism, globalisation, etc., and almost all the world is almost everywhere worse off - time to junk the voodoo. Idiots.

The blame may be attributed to three classes of idiots; 1) the economists, 2) the politicians, and 3) any voters who tolerate any part of the prior 1&2. But the voters can't wear much blame, since their dumbed-down idiocy was mainly deliberately inflicted upon them, via their (incomplete if not misleading) schooling, their TVs (Hollywood's portrayal of all possible perversions), and the corrupt & venal MSM, who both conduit *and* actively assist the almost continuous stream of lies coming from the above 1&2. Hollywood + MSM 'infotainment' = the pushed propaganda paradigm; almost nothing is as they say it is (i.e. 'making the world safe for democracy'); note what they do = resource-wars = murder to steal, and the mostly already rich are getting ever more obscenely richer.

Economic phrases we hate to hear: Balanced budget, tax&spend, deficits, then 'service-cuts' & privatisations. Arguments (not debate) are often simplistic to misleading, to the point of being insulting to aware intelligence. Any idiot can promise to cut taxes (see Tony Abbott, say.)

We might need some semblance of balance over the long-haul (but see % below), however the current practices are producing chronic deficits, possibly none larger that those of the US, both domestic & external.

"On Saturday China, the largest foreign holder of US treasuries, had slammed what it said was the US "addiction" to debt.
In a stinging English-language commentary carried by Xinhua, China said it had "every right" to demand Washington address its structural debt problems and safeguard Chinese dollar assets.
"To cure its addiction to debts, the United States has to re-establish the common sense principle that one should live within its means," it said."

Recall that whatever else the US govt. is, it *should* be able to afford the best possible advice on the planet - but what a spectacular failure they demonstrate.

Note: Common sense = *not* voodoo.


The voodoo system has *failed*, as we can all see, but all they talk about are cuts and austerity = misery for most.

But there is one simpler way (Occam's razor; swish!) = tax the rich.

Yep; that'd do it, swish! = slash them back to reality.

Forget about trying to lower the bridge (= cut required, civilised spending); provide a rising-tide with fat-cats' properly increased taxes.

By definition, governments (should) provide required services that private enterprise can't or won't; take fresh drinking-water for everyone, or sewage, electricity, phone lines, roads, railways & public transport... education, and vitally medical/dental. The basic principle is egalitarian, what the individual can't, or private enterprise won't, is provided collectively, paid for by *fair = progressive* taxation.

Also by definition, give (= flog-off for a comparative pittance) any function to private enterprise, you get a for-profit regime whereby profit will always be preferred over performance (see Telstra's 'service obligation' and how that's avoided/abused/refused.) Also see that extracting profit adds to costs, and any claimed efficiencies may be compromised by the lean&mean, see electricity-bills going through the roof, and trees falling onto that roof = power-outages after any storm over fart-strength.

But there is additional simpler way (Occam's razor; swish!) = nationalise the banks.

Yep; that'd do it, swish! = slash them back to egality.

Even before going off 'real money' = gold etc., all 'printed' money is fiat but not only, all (new) money exits banks as %-bearing loans. Some old money lands back in banks as deposits to 'earn' some %, always (on average) at some lesser rate. The banks live of the %-difference, and what a comfortable living they 'allow' themselves - but the % is rent on money, a sample of what JMK was referring to when he recommended 'euthanasia of the rentiers.' Very few seem to notice that *no* money is created to pay the interest itself, so the end result is that the interest-bill balloons.

But if the banks are nationalised, the government collects the interest, which it can then spend on required items (see above), simultaneously reducing the amount by which the rich must be taxed. (Q: Why tax the rich anyway? A: Because they've got most of the money.)

Also, one of the insulting voodoo/neoliberal 'debate' items alleges that the rich must be ever-better 'rewarded,' because they create the jobs - see massive unemployment in 1st-world nations, especially the US. That worked out well, didn't it?

Tax the rich & nationalise the banks = two 'easy' ways to save the (financial) planet. Then begin effective moves on reducing atmospheric CO2 to below 300ppm.


eternal war
 never-ending suffering
  who cares, as long as the rich prosper?

.. keep jobs scarce ...

  .. keep education low ...

    .. never run out of 'grunts'


May d*g bless the thieving & murdering US, and all snivelling quislings. No one else will - nor should they.

Article 1:

Was the Bombing of Hiroshima Necessary? Three Myths Debunked
Oliver Lee (6aug'11)
  «The hard truth is that the atomic bombings were unnecessary. A million lives were not saved. Indeed, McGeorge Bundy, the man who first popularized this figure, later confessed that he had pulled it out of thin air in order to justify the bombings in a 1947 Harper's magazine essay he had ghostwritten for Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson.» 

Comment: Read it all; no further comment.

Article 2:

The Great Hiroshima Cover-up
Greg Mitchell
August 3, 2011
  «In the weeks following the atomic attacks on Japan sixty-six years ago this week, and then for decades afterward, the United States engaged in airtight suppression of all film shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombings. This included vivid color footage shot by U.S. military crews and black-and-white Japanese newsreel film.» 

Comment: Read it all; Q: What did they have to hide?

Article 3:

The Hiroshima Myth
by John V. Denson
  «The best book, in my opinion, to explode this myth is The Decision to Use the Bomb by Gar Alperovitz, because it not only explains the real reasons the bombs were dropped, but also gives a detailed history of how and why the myth was created that this slaughter of innocent civilians was justified, ...» 

Comment: Read it all; justified? IMHO not and never.


Fazit: Ask yourself this: Why do you accept the status-quo {US super-power; its war-machine plundering the planet (with illegitimate Z-side-kick plundering Palestine), its economics system = rip-off neoliberalism destroying our livelihoods and living-standards, its filthy lies smothering all (good) morality},

 - and IF not THEN what are you doing about it - where 'it' = saving our once jewel-like planet?

moral cretins
 battle of ideas
  criminality wins - in US, is then exported

.. do unto others ...

  .. never do harm ...

    .. it's not too hard - for normal people, i.e. *non*-psychopaths[1]

Thesis/Subtitle: The phrase "you're either with us, or against us" and similar variations are used to depict situations as being polarized and to force witnesses and bystanders to become allies or lose favour. The implied consequence of not joining the team effort is to be deemed an enemy.


Preamble: It's easy enough to identify villains; all one needs to do is observe somewhat carefully, seeing clearly what they do and not paying too much attention to what they say, since lying (for crims) is easy; lies are the entry-point to serious crimes like cheating, stealing & murder.

I like doing 'binary splits' as in 'with or against' above, but recall one of my mates: "It is not simple." Consider then, a 4-split: 1) with, 2) against, 3) don't know and 4) don't care.

Posit: When we're considering truth & justice, only 'with' counts; don't know and don't care merge with against. For emphasis: Only people who actively agitate *for* truth & justice are OK-people, all others, i.e. against, don't know and don't care = *enemies* - of humanity.

Objection(s)? We the people are forced to surrender our sovereignty by 'the system;' the bargain (democratic covenant) is that the leaders work in our interests. Since they're demonstrably not doing so, we have now to *force* them to behave. This forcing requires us to work together (looping); see 'with or against' above.


Villain article #1:

Truman Lied, Hundreds of Thousands Died
By davidswanson - Posted on 05 August 2011
  «On August 6, 1945, President Harry S Truman announced: "Sixteen hours ago an American airplane dropped one bomb on Hiroshima, an important Japanese Army base. ...
When Truman lied to America that Hiroshima was a military base rather than a city full of civilians, ...»

Comment: In serious issues, a single lie destroys credibility completely. There were many more lies; IMHO the 'best-fit' theory includes a) they could and they'd payed for it, b) they wanted contrasting 'live' data Uranium vs. Plutonium, and (mainly) c) they wanted the USSR to see the US (bad) 'morality' in action.

Villain article #2:

Fighting Back Against The CIA Drone War
By: Muhammad Idrees Ahmad
July 31, 2011 "The Nation"
  «They call it “bug splat”, the splotch of blood, bones, and viscera that marks the site of a successful drone strike. To those manning the consoles in Nevada, it signifies “suspected militants” who have just been “neutralised”; to those on the ground, in most cases, it represents a family that has been shattered, a home destroyed.» 

Comment: The US' barbarity knows no bounds.

Villain article #3:

Meet the Right-Wing Hatemongers Who Inspired the Norway Killer
Why were America's Islamophobes able to avoid accountability for so long?
By Max Blumenthal
August 03, 2011
  «Asymmetrical warfare has been witnessed in theaters of war across the Muslim world, leaving tens of thousands of civilians dead in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Gaza Strip. The strategy was formalized in the Dahiya district of southern Beirut in 2006, when the Israeli military flattened hundreds of civilian structures and homes to supposedly punish Hezbollah for its capturing of two Israeli soldiers.» 

Comment: The Zs have been 'allowed,' by the UN (mainly US & UK influence) - to steal an entire country; deploying terrorism, ethnic cleansing and genocidal policies. The UN should have stopped the process, no later than Plan Dalet & the Deir Yassin massacre.

Villain article #4:

US calls for unity after credit rating cut
Updated August 07, 2011 09:02:45
  «Washington's allies in Europe and Asia rallied behind it, warning against overreaction to the downgrade, but China, the largest foreign holder of US treasuries, slammed US "addiction" to debt.» 

Comment 1: Here, one might consider US 'allies' as snivelling quislings; these 'allies' support *and adopt* US economic policies, just as they support *and adopt* the US military policies.

Comment 2: It's been a shameful spectacle; the Republicans and Democrats together refusing to cut military spending, refusing to increase taxation (to target the filthy rich), Obama extending the Bush tax-cuts and wars-for-spoil, even starting new wars. All the time the US infrastructure decays, unemployment and poverty increases, not to mention the drastically expensive, for-profit medical system the less-well-off are excluded from, and the only expenditure either major party will cut is on social programs. The only policies either will support are pro-war and anti-enlightenment - and these are the so-called 'world leaders?'


Musing: Here, as with 'with or against' truth & justice, one may be 'with or against' US+Z murdering to steal militarism, 'with or against' US-inspired rip-off neoliberalism, then there's the excess-CO2 caused climate-change catastrophe, one may be 'with or against' excess-CO2 prevention/cure.

Fazit: The villains will not change themselves - they are getting all they want, from a system they've so constructed. We the people have to unite and force beneficial change - or lose the lot.

It's easy enough to see what needs to be done; start with eliminating the lies, cheating, theft & murder; take our democracy back.



[1] psychopath  n. 1 mentally deranged person, esp. showing abnormal or violent social behaviour. 2 mentally or emotionally unstable person.  psychopathic adj. [POD]


economists with red faces
 politicians with blood on their hands
  voodoo = 'rational' theft, pentagon = murder for spoil

.. stagflation ...

  .. supply-side ...

    .. 'rationalist' lies

Preamble, 1: A rising tide lifts all boats.

Preamble, 2: A smaller slice of a bigger pie can be larger.

Preamble, 3: Both of the above are premeditated, filthy lies.

Preamble, Q: Why do I have to do this?

Preamble, A: Because the economists both won't and can't; the academics/teachers have sold out and the graduates lie to us.


Trigger article 1:

US credit rating cut for first time ever
Updated August 06, 2011 14:25:44
  «The United States' credit rating has been cut for the first time ever, with Standard & Poor's lowering it from AAA to AA+, citing the country's looming debt and deficit burden.
S&P attached a "negative outlook" to the new rating, despite a push back from the White House which said its analysis of the US economy was deeply flawed.»

Comment; Q1: What took this rating agency so long? The US has been broke for years.

Comment; Q2: What would the White House know? It/they are part of the cause, and like all politicians, they lie pretty-well continuously.

Trigger article 2:

Better than expected jobs figures for US
Updated August 06, 2011 09:39:00
  «LISA MILLAR: On a more wider front do you think that the economy is changing at all? Is there any optimism out there for people like yourself?
DIANE PITTS: No, I don't think so. I think it's getting worse. I don't see anything changing.»

Comment 1: PITTS is a 'vox-pop;' basically a useless method of gaining information; contrast with professionally organised polling, whereby they need to carefully select a thousand of so interviewees. Nevertheless, "thinking it's getting worse" is 100% correct, and has been 100% correct since the 70s at least.

Comment 2: Expecting a 0.1% change out of 9% to be significant, *especially* when the 9% is considered by many to be a lie, with the correct number being around 20% is bizarre. The 0.1% could merely be a statistical artefact - but they talk it up = more lies.

Trigger article 3:

US job figures temper market free fall
North America correspondent Lisa Millar, wires
  «RBS Morgans private client adviser Ken Howard says the market is being driven by sentiment, which makes forecasting the future tricky.» 

Comment: What's sentiment got to do with anything; the neoliberal market is *supposed* to know all!!? But then there'd be *no* stock market crashes, eh?

Trigger article 4:

Market tumble sparks super fears
By Ashley Hall
Updated August 06, 2011 11:08:53
  «Fears of another global downturn wiped more than $50 billion off the value of the Australian share market yesterday - a slide that would have been particularly worrying for retirees and people planning to give up work soon.
People living on a superannuation pension or the proceeds of a share portfolio say they are already struggling to pay the bills.»

Comment 1: Slick-Johnnie Howard was a great one for encouraging share ownership, for one reason at least, he needed mugs to buy shares in privatised entities like Telstra. In other words, Howard pushed the people into gambling with their savings = future retirement funds, onto the stock market. Even if people don't buy in directly, their super funds do it for them - hence the widespread, *justified* fear.

Comment 2: One of the reasons given for privatisation was a alleged shortage of investment 'opportunities,' and getting the people to buy shares forces them to have an interest in how the privatised entities perform. Hence, as in the case of the monopolist Telstra and electricity, water, gas etc., when share-holders get ripped-off on their bills, they can offset that - but only minimally - by any dividends they may then get. The major factor in buying shares in some shonky operation is to get an interest in perpetuating the shonk. Do anything for profit and you'll most likely = 99.9% get profit before performance by default; service levels usually drop and prices go up. Maintenance is minimised, now any storm above fart-level blows lines down all over the place = service *outages*.

Comment 3: Another of the reasons given for privatisation is that public-servants can't run chook-raffles and bludge continuously - but after privatisation, many such are hired back on as sub-contractors; lower head-counts, lower wages, lean & mean; stress, stress & more stress - but the same now ex-public-servants. Oh yes; plus a few management-types also remain, again the same now ex-public-servants, but now fabulously rewarded for their 'genius.' You work it out.


It doesn't take much genius to see that neoliberalism is bad news for most, and after 30-40 or so years of it, the proof is in, well in. No surprise; it works as designed; the rich got/are still getting richer, and many of the poor are well on their way to serfdom - so Q: Why don't we have a revolution? A: Because those most affected are (no apologies) the dumbest; they got that way partly by choice (TV-watching is just sooo easy); but mostly by being deliberately lied to, i.e. "Competition/free markets are good for *all*!" (See Preamble 1 & 2, say.)

Disclosure: I'm not one of the poor serfs, but neither am I an obscenely rich fat-cat ripper-off type. It means that I'm *not* motivated by wealth-envy (as r-whinger trolls are apt to fallaciously assert), rather by outrage at the lies, unfairness & outright criminality of many of our 'leading citizens.' Also, whereas there are undoubtably some lazy, skiving public-servants and some unnecessary bureaucracy, it's no reason to paint all govt. black. Proper management would help, but the neoliberalist erring ideological thrust is to junk all government, kill-off all govt. services - all govt. everywhere - except the 'security industry' = police, spies & military = 'enforcement' thugs, liars & killers.

The rich got/are still getting richer by two main pathways, a) by benefiting from the general business shonkiness (greatly helped by deregulation, say, and typified by the motto 'greed is good' - but which isn't), and b) by being largely, newly untaxed. Both a&b arise from the rich having purchased the sell-out politicians, justifying it all by the sell-out academics/economists' and think-tanks' erring ideology. Nowhere is this more clearly and criminally illustrated than "The Israel Lobby."


Suck it up; move on!

If we imagine our situation as a brick wall, we started out with a largely white one, the white having been provided to us by history; influenced by The Enlightenment (Liberté, égalité, fraternité, say), the struggles for justice for workers (8-hr day, etc.), the fall-out of the 1929 stock exchange crash/depression, and the post WW2 'good times' of the 50s & 60s, and the then apparently-OK "of, by, for the people etc." democracy.

Each time we the people lost some 'skirmish,' a brick in the wall turned black. Keywords: Supply-side, economic rationalism, neoliberalism, globalisation. We had/have no effective choice; representatives purporting to be working *for* us either 'allowed' some change (deregulations, or simply bad laws - ½CGT, SerfChoices) or actually did the bad deeds (privatisations, service cuts etc.). The only effective say we are usually left with is to de-elect; note, *after* any damage is done. Too bloody late, mate! Yes, there were the odd occasions when the voters chose their own poison in advance; Howard's never-ever GST resuscitated being one of them. A regressive tax, sold with lies; to 'set us free?' Perhaps Howard meant following "Arbeit macht Frei." How he must have laughed! Now, our wall is mostly black; suck it up, move on!


Some way-points:

1. August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively; the twin atomic-bombing war crimes.

2. May 15, 1948++, Nakba Day. The UN, mainly US+UK, allowed the aggressive Z-invaders to steal an entire country = Palestine. 2nd greatest crime of the century.

3. August 15, 1971, the Nixon Shock = US-bankruptcy, end of Bretton Woods.

4. December 2, 1972, Election of the 1st Whitlam govt, plus subsequent construction of the original Medibank.

5. November 11, 1975, Aus' day of political infamy. Among the corrupt goings-on was a 100+ day campaign against Gough by Murdoch's theAus.

6. 1979-80, first TINA-Thatcher & voodoo-Reagan governments.

7. 1983 to 1996, Hawke-Keating Government, neoliberalism for Aus.

8. 1996 to 2007, Howard Government, aggressive invasion of Iraq.

9. March 19 2011, latest US (NATO; F, UK & +) attack against Libya.

10. August 06 2011, US credit rating cut for first time ever, exactly 66 years to the day since making themselves the world's #1 pariah; unlikely ever to be contested - except possibly by the equal #1, the I/J/Z-plex. After all, *someone* has to be 'top-shit.'


No free lunch?

From The Nixon Shock [ibid.]:
  «By the early 1970s, as the costs of the Vietnam War and increased domestic spending accelerated inflation,[1] the U.S. was running a balance-of-payments deficit and a trade deficit, the first in the 20th century.» 

Q: What's changed?

A: Not much.

This is how the US$-racket works:

The US (Fed, other private banks) 'print' fiat-$s, conjuring them out of thin air = nowhere. The $s are loaned to trading entities, and are spent on local goods & services or imports; Mercedes cars or oil, say. Local $s go around in cycles, landing in banks as deposits, 'balancing' part of the loans, but 'earning' less % than the borrowers pay = 'normal' bank business, and what a good (= more than enough) business it is. Part of the (assumed) profit made by the borrowing entities is paid in interest, a 'normal' business expense always passed onto the customer (not incidentally, making things *more* expensive). So far so 'normal,' hardly different than any other country - BUT: The US, from those very same 70s, has been running an ever-widening trade-deficit (as their govt. now runs a chronic domestic-deficit.)

Deficits result from wanting more than you can pay for, but what gets Greece into trouble is 'business as usual' for the US; how/why?

The chronic govt. domestic-deficit should hardly need explaining; politicians simply *love* bribing voters, so there is always a demand-pull tending to expand govt. spending, and all people hate paying taxes, so there is always a cost-push depressing govt. income. Easy-peasy, and as Abbott repeatedly demonstrates, any idiot can promise to cut taxes, or oppose taxes like mining & climate taxes, which might a) get us a fair share of the mining boom, or even b) save the planet from an excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe. Ho, hum; thanks, but "No, thanks!" for your ultra-cynical populism, Tony. Not that Rudd/Gillard are actually delivering what we the people need, but some thoughts are there. Another note; 'best of a bad lot' is still bad, what we really need is the absolute best, fat chance in current environment.

Also please note: By no means all govt. spending is on bribes; specifically, egalitarian-access to necessary medical & dental services, plus income-support for all below an acceptable income-earning capacity is a *requirement* of any civilised society. (As is 100% govt. paid for, *truthful, comprehensive* education, as far 'up' as necessary. An education system, apparently as any other system, dependent on patronisation will go corrupt. Proof is our economists.) Any arguing against, or actually cutting services below a civilised minimum - should be 1st ostracised, 2nd locked up if not 3rd shot, as unfeeling, power-mad psychopaths. But that is *precisely* what most Republicans are demanding, and many Democrats (incl. Obama) are delivering; bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic. Again, they can only get away with such due to the dumbing-down of the public, via *and actively assisted by* the 4th estate = corrupt & venal MSM, incl. 'our' AusBC.


The chronic foreign-deficit can be explained partly so:

If the US had only one single industry left, it would be armaments. As it is they have a few other arrows left in their quiver; namely Boeing, Microsoft & Apple. Boeing's aircraft are not at all bad (my current favourite is 777, but the A380 is a winner.) Microsoft makes lots of $s, while delivering *extremely* shitty product (this article being produced *in spite of* W7. A beautiful piece of hardware, crippled by MS - boo!) Apple makes extremely successful = extremely expensive toys; the people are to be condemned for wanting = buying such marginally useful rubbish (excepting Nano-G3.)

To the Mercedes/oil case, as an example for generalisation.

The Germans make Mercedes cars, screwed together by Turks in Sindelfingen (me: Sifi.) They sell some to the US, getting $US in return. They, (all sorts of Germans), like zipping along their (some still non-speed limited) Autobahns, for which they need fuel = pay with $US. When the fuel is all gone, they have to go and make another few Mercedes cars, repeat.

The $US are traded for fuel from the multi-national oil companies; mostly US but some UK and F, instantly explaining the NATO attacks on Libya, B, B & H's attack on Iraq, Afghanistan for pipeline-routes - Iran next? But note, this ties in with 'murder for spoil,' the other major one being Zs' mayhem/plunder of Palestine.

The current price (note, not value) of oil is around $80 in EU/USA ($120 tapis; what's the diff?) The cost of FOB delivery in the ME was estimated in 2003+/- at around $1 only. The difference is the profit pocketed by the oil-multis, another explanation for Iraq, etc., and also called 'economic rent.' This is one reason why JMK called for euthanasia of the rentiers, and similar to what Rudd was aiming for with the MRRT.

The $s generated by the oil-trade are, not surprisingly, called petro-dollars, and even though the oil-resource owners get a miserable pittance (just like us, we the sheople in Aus, vis-à-vis the mining boom), still a lot of $s accumulate - which are often swapped for arms, mainly US, and when not then 'stashed' by buying US-treasury bonds.

Repeat this analogy with Chinese manufactures; US-jobs off-shored & out-sourced, big profits accumulating in China, Japan, etc. - again stashed as US-treasuries. In a word: Trillions.

All the $US sloshing around the world are effectively useless to the holders, and (recalling oil-burning = up in smoke, as exploding bombs) are roughly equal to the US external deficit = free lunch, not only but also breakfast, dinner & desert.

One more repeat: All those useless $s cost *zero* to print.

All the US bombs can do is blow things up = destroy and kill.

All this is neoliberalism = rip-offs + militarism = murder for spoil.

Fazit: *Despite* the free-lunch they've given themselves with the $US oil-racket, despite the *trillions* of otherwise useless $s held by supplier-nations, the US is still going broke - because, in the end analysis, they won't properly tax their corrupt rich. The purchased-politicians and the corrupt & venal MSM lie to us continuously, as the US & Z militaries continuously kill to steal. What a world!

Where are the effective, countervailing resistors?




Would the aggressive invaders kindly return to behind their own frontiers, please?

Trigger article:

Gaddafi's son killed in airstrike, rebels say
Updated August 05, 2011 19:50:21
  «A rebel spokesman said a NATO air attack killed 32 people, among then Moamar Gaddafi's son Khamis, who serves as one of the main commanders of the Libyan leader's military forces.» 

Comment 1: IF Gaddafi's son Khamis is a commander THEN he's defending his country against a fake 'rebellion,' backed by alien invaders = NATO, itself a puppet of the US, with prime-poodles Sarkozy(F) & Cameron(UK).

Comment 2: Who will rid us of this pestilence (US, NATO(UK, F), Zs etc.)?

A: Not the UN (Ban Ki-moon, Russia, China et al.), they 'allow' it.

A: Not Germany; they 'tolerate/support' it.

A: Not England; they're in it.

A: Not France; they're in it.

A: Not Norway; they're in it.

A: Not we the people; we have no say.

But it's murder for spoil (again? No, still); at Nuremberg they hanged such wickedly criminal perpetrators.

Q: There must be reasonable people in this world; enough to call *effectively* for truth and justice;


the economy is basically sound!
 rule: never talk it down
  but not this time

.. Nixon: "I am not a crook!" ...

  .. but Oh, yes he was ...

    .. as are all his successors


"Earlier stock markets across Europe had all closed more than 3 per cent down as economists warned of the chance of a fresh global financial crisis sparked by the fear of European debt contagion spreading to Italy and a lack of confidence in the US economy."

Comment 1: Why are economists warning? No-one in this 'business' does anything without a plan, so why talk it down? Against all rules.

Comment 2: Please explain "European debt contagion spreading," i.e. exactly how/why what happens in one country (Greece, say) may affect another (here, Italy)? All these countries (PIIGS + B, UK, more?) are being *pushed* into crisis.

"Even so-called defensive stocks such as Telstra and Woolworths were down 2.4 and 2.7 per cent respectively, as investors fled shares for cash."

Comment 3: For every seller there's (still?) a buyer.

Comment 4: How does anyone know what drives the herd? Except to say that fear-mongering works.

What we know:

1. Since the US 'went broke' = off gold on August 15, 1971, effectively all currencies have been 'fiat;' money being created by the stroke of a pen, or these days on a computer keyboard (= 'printing').

2. The $US became the world's reserve currency, effectively backed not by gold but oil. Almost all oil is denominated in $US, notable exceptions being (temporarily) Iraq, say, and see what happened to them.

3. It is a 'normal' function of central banks to determine the quantity of money on the 'Goldilocks' principle, i.e. neither too few nor too many, but 'just right;' determined as a function of inflation. The RBA sets a 'headline' target of 2-3% - but why not zero?

4. The inflation figures are fiddled; substituting lower-cost items for increasers, like chicken instead of beef (end result for pensioners = tinned cat-food, anecdotally.) They also omit rents, as if sleeping under a bridge was an 'acceptable substitution.'

5. Asset inflation cannot be 'quarantined,' however much they might try; $s are fungible and any/all inflation means too many *printed* $s.

6. After inflating madly, Aus house-prices seem to have hit a 'natural' = affordability limit. (Inflating mostly thanks, but "No, thanks!" to Howard/Costello's ½CGT; Aus house-prices went through the roof, as are *privatised* electricity costs, etc..)

7. All bubbles eventually collapse, this having been known at least since 1929. Perhaps this stock-market 'correction' is a true collapse, but again, why are most/all commenters talking a crash *up*?



1. 'Real' $s: There are none. Under 'fractional reserve banking,' the trading banks have 'real money' reserve-accounts (originally share capital, say) in the 'national reserve bank,' and are allowed to create some multiple of 'credit money' which they then loan out to customers, typically businesses (or home buyers.) All money loaned attracts some % = interest. Since $s are 'fungible,' no distinction can now be made between 'real money' and 'credit money;' all $s in circulation attract interest - even when deposited as a credit, any interest paid by banks is (on average) less than that charged on loans. Apart from minimal and reducing bank-overheads (function/jobs off-shoring, down-sizing, going ever-more lean&mean), loan-interest is a stealth tax, passed on to us, we the people, disguised as a 'cost of business.' Nevertheless, stealth or not, a tax is a tax, and fiat-$s cost *nothing* to print.

2. Speaking of taxes, ever since TINA-Thatcher and voodoo-Reagan, politicians have been cutting taxes, mostly off the rich, and at the same time cutting public services and privatising public enterprises, most despicably needed utilities like water, sewage & electricity = neoliberalising. The absolute worst is pushing privatised medicine; do anything 'for profit' and you will get profit before performance. All knowingly, cynically done; and when the doing gets tough, hand the job to the so-called 'progressives,' since they purport to be the people's friends; when progressives neoliberalise, the stunned people are more likely to 'accept' it. Note that bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic.

As a truly disgusting example, see the latest 'stunt' by Obama; cutting deeply into welfare whilst hardly touching the military, let alone requiring the filthy rich to shoulder even part of their responsibility-share.

3. Whatever; any idiot can cut taxes (see Abbott), but cutting services = neoliberalising takes longer so there's a lag; voila: Debt crises -> wicked austerity. All done on purpose.


Intermezzo: Anticipating Perkins below, the US plus hangers-on are increasingly attacking innocents, mostly Arab/Muslims in the middle-East, not by happenstance where lots of oil is, plus an illegitimate rogue state living on stolen land. These aggressive invaders, short-handed as the US-M/I/C/4-plex, their accessory-thugs NATO and the I/J/Z-plex are now killing with impunity to steal resources = oil, land & water.

The 4 stands for 4th estate, aka the corrupt & venal MSM. Even publicly financed broadcasters are 'in it' = relaying and *actively assisting* the propaganda, 'perfectly' typified by reporting on the vicious, illegal NATO bombing of Libyan TV; the newsreaders saying (my paraphrase; transcripts *not* available): "NATO had to destroy Libyan TV to protect civilians." Risible = criminal, the bombing and the reporting both.

Apropos the AusBC, it/they have drastically reduced the opportunity for feedback/comment; as one example of many, the unleashed-forum commenting time now cut to minimal tending to useless, favouring the quick-draw pro-war, pro-Z & pro-crime propagandist-trolls.


But what is the end-game? People going broke everywhere, following deliberately caused unemployment; the wages/salaries portion dropping like stones, govt-service reductions, costs soaring, always fewer $s for the people, going on ever increasingly expensive items.

Perkins' "Economic Hit Man" explains the process (IMF SAPs; forced onto 3rd world, same process being done *voluntarily* by so-called democracy-leaders); then when all else fails, send in the military - Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.; when Merkel dragged the IMF into the EU-crisis, I knew she was being bad, and nothing good would result. See 'as are all his successors.'

Most people's money has now long been committed; forced savings being their only possible savings, and most of the forced savings landing in the stock-exchange (or investment-housing for the better-off savers.) If stock- and house-prices now crash, affected savings will be wiped out - the people will have less for the future, as well as being on the limit now. Who's winning? Not us, we the people. Yet the financial system is presumably working 'as designed,' by the 'geniuses' in parliaments, Wall St & (corrupt!) universities. It must be so, since they *made* it so.

And the banks, with their fat-cat shareholders, are already obscenely rich - on printed = intrinsically worthless fiat-$s. Yet they still want more, and will probably get it - shortly after this current little 'shake-down' subsides.