Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Fifty Paul Krugmans

Fifty Herbert Hoovers is an article written by Krugman. In it, he talks about the budget problems states are facing, and how the best solution is to spend more money! More debt! Yes, he is advocating that states too should go into debt to sustain an unsustainable bubble. I guess counties and cities should also go into debt too eh?

This comes from an Economic Nobel laureate? One who gained popularity as a contrarian to the fiscal insanity that is wrecking the world? His great solution is more fiscal insanity? Ha!

And that's my point. The mainstream media builds up these people who pretend to be a contrarian voice, then they use that reputation to manufacture consent. They manufacture a willingness in people to be robbed and looted even more. There are fifty Paul Krugmans out there. (At least fifty.) And each one of them took a great deal of time to build their reputation. But their reputations are destroyed overnight when they are called upon to perform their First Duty, to be a contingent trump card for the elite. To be willingly thrown under the bus to protect the system.

That system is broken. Productive capacity is shutting down. Mines and wells are shutting down too. Many projects that got shelved cannot simply be restarted. Obama could walk into the room with a trillion dollars and say, "Here's some money, now turn everything back on. Continue with Plan: Business As Usual." But it doesnt work that way. That is why stimulus plans fail. There are countless complex systems in the world that require years to cycle back up to the level they were at before they shut down. Even if the shutdown only took weeks, the restart could take months or years. By dumping a bunch of stimulus money into the economy, what it will do is cause a commodity explosion in which Wall Street sucks up all the money into its black vortex. That is precisely what happened with both Bush stimulus plans. And both plans made the recessions even worse.

It doesnt even matter how the money is spent. (Yes even if the money is directed at state budget deficits.) It still creates the same artificial demand for commodities causing the price increases to eat up the stimulus.

I'm sure that Krugman is aware of this, but for some reason just doesnt care. I guess he did it for that fake Nobel prize. Who knows. I dont care what his motivations are. What matters is the sheer number of these people. Most of them claim to be Keynesians. Does it matter to them that Keynesianism is completely unsustainable? No. Does it even matter to them that the philosophy they follow isnt even Keynesianism at all?

Keynesianism as it exists today is complete rubbish. Something like "sustainable Keynesianism" or "steady-state Keynesianism" makes more sense to me. (Though some would call it an oxymoron.) My point is that Keynesianism, if followed strictly in a repeatable, sustainable, and logical manner would involve deficit spending ONLY in a time of recession. AND it would and MUST require a budget surplus during each and every period of GDP growth. This is an absolute must in order for Keynesianism to work. Obviously NONE of these Fifty Paul Krugmans out there are actual true Keynesians.

And that is the heart of what I'm trying to get at here. These people are complete phonies. They're always claiming to be something, and then being something else entirely. And they rely upon the media to redefine terms for the public to support the illusion. The Keynesians arent Keynesians. The Monetarists arent Monetarists. The Conservatives arent Conservatives. I can factually prove that they arent what they say they are, just by looking at definitions. So the question then becomes: just what in the hell are these people?

In short, they are pawns of the global elite. Right now, their primary purpose is to continue business as usual so that the government can rack up debt and get everyone dependent. By continuing to rack up debt, they can keep taxes high. Especially property taxes. That is the key. One central tenant of "new world order philosophy" is keeping property taxes as high as possible, while printing money to stimulate the economy, even if it means printing money to keep people in their homes. This is very important. By setting up this property tax + stimulus scenario, they are able to effectively destroy individual property rights. You are now dependent on government in order to pay your property taxes, to such an absurd degree that property rights are de facto nonexistant. That is the key to all of this. With property rights gone, you have a de facto command and control economy. It can NO LONGER be called capitalism, though the corrupt leaders will attempt to call it whatever they want. All the Krugmans of the world understand this fully. Because they all read the famous quote by Jefferson:

If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.

First by inflation and then by deflation? What exactly does that mean? It means they create more and more debt, and devalue the currency, and allow taxes to rise with it. Particularly property taxes. Then when the debt bubble collapses (which it will because interest is an exponential function), no one has money to pay their property taxes. Then they are at the mercy of the corrupt tyrannical government. The Obama stimulus will only make the problem worse. It is an attack on the core principle of capitalism, private property rights. People have to play politics in order to maintain their property, unless they are extremely lucky in their ability to out-profit the destruction of the currency. That is how we transition into the 4th Reich. This is not an opinion, this is a fact I state with complete confidence. The government intervention creates the depression. The coming depression will be the result of the meddling by politicians and others who do not understand (or have contempt for) capitalism.

Thursday, December 04, 2008

Bailout Blues

To bailout or not to bailout, that is the question facing congress. Should the Big 3 Stooges be bailed out?

They're currently asking for $34 billion. (The number seems to grow on a daily basis.)

Congress has two choices. If they dont approve the bailout, then it means that they confirm once again that they are wall street shills. Because they've already given over $700 billion to bailout the banks. Ironically, if you take just the bailout money that went offshore, you'd have more than enough to cover the needs of the Big 3 Stooges. Bank of America alone sent $7 billion to China. That's just one transaction. There are dozens of these "malicious" foreign investments of bailout funds.

How can I not use the term malicious? How else can you describe what they're doing? When congress gives money to banks who then turn around and send that money overseas, what does it mean? And when that same congress refuses to give money to GM, Ford, and Chrysler, what does that mean in this context? It can only mean one thing: they are deliberately trying to destroy this country. Such things do not happen by accident. Since most congresscritters have an IQ of at least 80, one cannot simply blame it on pure stupidity.

If congress doesnt bail out the Big 3, then they must take action to reign back in the bailout money that was sent overseas. But what are the chances of that happening? None, if they are indeed controlled by some "as yet unexplained occult force".

When I wrote about the impending fall of GM two years ago, I did not envision this kind of twilight zone nonsense accompanying it. I never imagined that the same congress which sent billions overseas would then refuse to help domestic manufacturers, with millions of jobs on the line. They may as well just pass a bill that transfers all legislative power to the CFR, and be done with it.

What does it matter that the CEOs of the Big 3 flew to Washington in corporate jets? Billions of dollars in bailout funds went to companies with CEOs flying around Asia in corporate jets. Yet we dont hear one peep out of the media about them. How does one explain such things?

We are redefining the phrase "too far gone" on a daily basis. There is simply no "mainstream" explanation of what is going on here.