IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS
| disappearing debt...|
bro Jeff, Greetings in JEsus' Name by Whose Blood we are Saved.AMEN.
i found this on msn, [url=http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/News/FedsBudgetTricksHideTrillionsInDebt.aspx]feds hiding debt[/url]
grace and Peace are ours in Jesus.AMEN.
| 2007/11/21 14:07||Profile|
| Re: disappearing debt...|
Decay, Economic Downturn and Revolution
by J. R. Nyquist
Weekly Column Published: 11.26.2007
One day the United States, as we know it, will disappear and Washington, D.C. will not be the capital of a great nation. But before history reaches this moment, millions of Americans will experience the greatest economic reversal of all time. Consider the logic of this scenario. If America is destined to disappear, the first warning signs will be on the economic front. And now we see the signs, all around. Those who favor U.S. power should be worried. Americas military advantage exists as an economic corollary, and the economic news is bad. There have been trade imbalances. An enormous amount of debt has been accumulated, and the dollar is falling fast.
The American Republic is neither invincible nor immortal. At present, the Republic is sick. There is much amiss: No great figures appear on the national stage; The populous is distracted and the pundits are blind to the great and ever-present danger of a repetition, on a bigger and more deadly scale, of the madness of 1939-45. An entire generation has grown up without any knowledge of what those years actually signify, or of what the preceding years of 1929-1939 signify. The American people are no longer unified, nor do they think of themselves primarily as Americans; neither do they agree on fundamental principles. In fact, a significant percentage of the population is foreign. Some are resident aliens, while up to 15 to 20 million are illegal aliens. As a people Americans are caught up with entertainment and consumption. While citizenship and patriotism still exist, they are significantly attenuated. As a territory, the national border is a joke. The political authorities do not have the will to police the border to the degree required for effective security. As for the government, it is too often the puppet of various special interest groups environmentalists who seek to destroy key domestic industries, ethnic leaders who divide and conquer by exploiting grievances, lobbyists who represent companies seeking to trade with foreign enemies. The old statesmanship and statecraft is gone.
The United States of America is more fragile today than it was in 1861. It is more fragile than at any time since the adoption of the Constitution. It is fragile because the countrys psychology, ethnic makeup, ideology, intellectual acuity and morality have undergone a revolution for the worse. Technology has changed the way we receive and process information by removing detail in favor of the grand sweep (with moving pictures and sound). Technology has changed the relationship between man and woman. It has changed the relationship between parent and child. Karl Marx once said that religion was the opium of the people. And what if the people can get their hands on real opium? And so they do in America. There is a pill for everything. There is a pill if you are fat, a pill if you are sad, and a pill if your child doesnt behave in class. Such are the epiphenomena of convenience, Americas special highway to Hell.
The inward decline of America is already a done deal. The cataclysmic consequences are yet to occur. Be prepared. A time of troubles is coming. Capitalism is about to become a whipping boy once again, together with the unfortunate salutation: Were from the government, and were here to help. Statism is part and parcel of Americas sickness. If we think government is too big now, just wait till the crisis worsens. Consider the following formula: The more government does, the less the economy has. With regard to the present mortgage crisis, or the soon-to-occur banking crisis, the taxpayer is twisting on a hook. Only he doesnt feel the pain yet. It takes pain a long time years in fact to travel from the politicians beatitude to the taxpayers mangled trunk. When the taxpayer cries out there will be new beatitudes, new hooks and more twisting. In this way a crash becomes a slump, a slump becomes a depression, and the taxpayer becomes a pauper. If mortgage lending is falling off, the government cannot rectify the situation. But watch them try, and watch them make a worse mess than you can imagine.
On Saturday the Associated Press ran a story with the headline, Mortgage Failures Could Create Nightmare, by Joe Bel Bruno. The story quotes Bill Gross, who runs the worlds largest bond fund: We havent faced a downturn like this since the Depression. Bruno also quotes Mark Patterson, a hedge-fund specialist: Were nowhere close to the end of the collapse. In this scenario, capitalism would not be the only whipping boy. Uncle Sam and American Imperialism would be right up there, in the crosshairs. Even now, the rising socialist dictator in Venezuela wants OPEC to use oil as a weapon to curb imperialism. This radical anti-capitalist message hardly appeals to the sheikdoms of the Persian Gulf. But one day, the anti-capitalist mentality that prevails in many countries and in many American universities might win a disgruntled majority at the polls.
The main anti-capitalist player on the world stage is the Kremlin (together with its partner, China). Russian planners have been waiting for a U.S. economic crisis for decades. They have long schemed to exploit such a crisis. But exploiting the economic downfall of a great power is dangerous. The great power could lash out. In fact, Soviet military textbooks long ago warned of capitalisms warmongering circles and the last gasps of imperialism. It is therefore important to be vigilant from the outset. One week ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that Russias nuclear forces were ready to repel any aggressor. He publicly accused the United States and its allies of a military buildup on Russias borders.
What are we to make of this? It is palpably ridiculous. The United States doesnt want war with Russia, and doesnt plan any aggression against Russia. Accusing the United States, however, comes directly out of the Soviet playbook. Putins game is therefore the same old game the Great Game.
A Soviet bloc high-level defector named Jan Sejna, writing in 1982, said the Kremlins long-range strategy hung on a future economic crisis in the West. The Soviet view, Sejna explained, was that during Phase Three [of the plan] Capitalism would suffer an economic crisis that would bring Europe to its knees. This crisis would stimulate the influence of progressive forces
. In September 1967 Secretary Konstantin Katushev of the Soviet Central Committee explained to the Czech Communist leadership: If we can impose on the U.S.A. the external restraints proposed in our Plan, and seriously disrupt the American economy, the working and the lower middle classes will suffer the consequences and they will turn on the society that has failed them. They will be ready for revolution. With remarkable prescience, Katushev told his Czech colleagues that American technology would contribute significantly to future economic destabilization. He correctly predicted that in the future, due to technological advances, unskilled American workers would find it increasingly difficult to make a decent living. This phenomenon, said Katushev, is one I consider the United States cannot deal with. There was a danger, he admitted, that the United States could swing violently to the right. However, the American governing elite, he said, is fundamentally liberal in their outlook, so the revolution should be won by the left.
Time will tell.
| 2007/11/26 18:34||Profile|
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS
Bro Jeff, Greetings in Jesus' Name by Whose Blood we are Saved.AMEN.
this scenario is quite similar to what i believe more and more our Lord has been showing me over the last couple of yrs. the general populous isn't going to take kindly or very well the loss of jobs and well being, the military can't be sustained at current strength indefinately in th event of this collapse...there will be days of much turmoil ahead in which all things will be shaken and that which will endure to the end will be whatever God has wrought.
Read a couple of interesting articles today:
[url=http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/News/StockMarketsWildRideDyn.aspx?cp-documentid=5200105]dow off 237 pts[/url]
[url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21975262/]CitiGroup to cut jobs[/url]
There are some unsettling things going on here. When the finacial firms are having a hard time that is said to be a sign of something going on. There have been comparisons between now and 1929 and major finacial companies are taking big hits...and the worst isn't here yet.
God help us.AMEN.
Grace and Peace are ours in Jesus.AMEN.
| 2007/11/26 20:37||Profile|
| Re: interesting|
Beware our shadow banking system
We have a secret banking system built on derivatives and untouched by regulation, says Pimco's Bill Gross. Here's how to protect your pocketbook.
By Bill Gross, founder and chief investment officer of Pimco
(Fortune Magazine) -- The tangled web of subprimes has claimed more than its share of victims in recent months: homeowners by the hundreds of thousands, to be sure, but also those who created, packaged, insured, distributed, and ultimately bought what should have been labeled "junk mortgages" but which by a masterstroke of marketing genius received a more respectable imprimatur.
"Skim milk masquerades as cream," warned Gilbert and Sullivan over a century ago, and sure enough, today's subprimes, packaged into financial conduits with monikers such as SIVs and CDOs, pretended to be AAA-rated cubes of butter.
Financial institutions fell for the ruse, and now we all suffer the consequences. Defaults are rising, the dollar's sinking, and -- good Lord! -- even Google's (Charts, Fortune 500) stock price is going down. Something must really be wrong.
It is. What we are witnessing is essentially the breakdown of our modern-day banking system, a complex of leveraged lending so hard to understand that Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke required a face-to-face refresher course from hedge fund managers in mid-August.
My Pimco colleague Paul McCulley has labeled it the "shadow banking system" because it has lain hidden for years, untouched by regulation, yet free to magically and mystically create and then package subprime loans into a host of three-letter conduits that only Wall Street wizards could explain.
It is certainly true that this shadow system, with its derivatives circling the globe, has democratized credit. And as the benefits of cheaper financing became available to the many as opposed to the few, placating and calming waves of higher productivity and widespread diversification led to accelerating economic growth, incomes, and corporate profits.
Yet, as is humanity's wont, we overdid a good thing, and the subprime skim milk has soured.
Still, to equate rancid milk with a breakdown in today's banking system is a bit much, don't you think? Aren't our central bankers coming to the rescue with lower interest rates, and doesn't Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson finally have a plan to steady Citigroup (Charts, Fortune 500) and friends with a "super-SIV"?
They are, and he does -- but cheap financing and SIV bailouts may not be enough to restore confidence in a shadow system built on fragile foundations. Financed conduits supported by $1 trillion of asset-backed commercial paper were constructed on the basis of AAA ratings that suggested -- no, practically guaranteed -- that the investments could never fail: no skim, just the crème de la crème.
Now, as the subprimes undermine those structures and the confidence in them, it is a stretch of the imagination to suggest that 75 basis points of interest rate cuts by the Fed will bring back the love.
As the commercial-paper market shrinks by hundreds of billions of dollars a month, central banks worldwide are facing a giant stress test of the shadow banking system. The publicized and photographed overnight "runs" on Countrywide and Britain's Northern Rock in mid-August were nothing compared to what's taking place in the shadows of the real banking system.
How does one protect during a run "deposits" that no one can see? To be blunt, what does it mean for your pocketbook?
To understand where future losses may lie, it makes sense to ask which investments did especially well during the shadow's formation. Home prices have been the obvious first hit -- down 5% nationwide already, with perhaps another 10% to go over the next several years.
Following in lockstep have been financial stocks with subprime exposure, to be joined in short order by consumer-based equities, as jobs and disposable income falter. These investments thrived as the shadow worked its voodoo; now its curse will sap money from the pockets of any and all who believed in its black magic.
Importantly, add to the list of investment victims the strength and viability of our national currency. The SIVs and CDOs of years past supported the dollar at unrealistic levels as foreign investment in the hundreds of billions poured into our markets.
Now, with confidence waning, the visible but unphotographable run from George Washington into the euro, the yen, and other currencies is under way. Protecting an American-made pocketbook should begin by seeing that purchasing power is more likely to be enhanced via investments in strong currencies, not weak ones. More than ever, your portfolio should have a international perspective and include non-dollar-denominated assets.
Investors should anticipate that the shadow's successor will be a more conservative, less risk-oriented banking system. The shadow writes, and having writ will move on to new sources of wealth creation in faraway corners of the globe. Go with it.
(end of article)
the love of money drove this behavior....
| 2007/11/29 0:56||Profile|
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS
Greetings in Jesus' Name by Whose Blood we are Saved.AMEN.
the big banks have taken big hits this time around some 30-50% on some of the stocks but something is looming which is going to push us over this knife edge. even so some people have made lots of money betting against the subprime lending deal and the banks behind it, one guy made a net profit of $12 billion while another invested 80 mil and turned it into 4-6 times that...only in America...
but for how much longer, this is Dec 1 and by Dec 31 we'll be in a different America once most of us lose our shirts. we treat eachother poorly now when things are relatively ok, how much more when all is lost? God help us.AMEN.
Grace and Peace are ours in Jesus.AMEN.
| 2007/12/1 20:56||Profile|
I was reading testimony from Federal Reserve Chairman Benanke in regards to the proposed stimulus plan being advocated by our leaders.
In his testimony, he states that he has a concern about where us Americans will spend our checks that we get from the US government.
Benanke states that Americans must purchase American made goods in order for the stimulus package to have any effect on our economy in the short run.
Now up to this point in time, the leaders of this country have promoted free markets and globalization of our economy. They have stated that our economy is growing stronger because of these trends.
But now, because of this stimulus package, we as a people will borrow the money from the Chinese and Middle Eastern countries, to turn around and spend this borrowed money on oil and Chinese goods.
This is another example of a double standard that is promoted by the leaders of this country.
| 2008/1/28 13:03||Profile|
Good points and yes this appears to be true.
I would also note that the amount being sent is couriously in step with monthly mortgage payments.
This could be a windfall for the mortgage industry.
Subliminal sub prime subjective substitute???
| 2008/1/28 18:03||Profile|
Autarky and Ancient Wisdom
by J. R. Nyquist
Weekly Column Published: 03.28.2008
Republicans who are shaky on protection are shaky all over.
Joseph Wharton, Pennsylvania steel magnate
PrintIn 1892 Congressman William McKinley warned that abandoning American protectionism and adopting free trade would revolutionize the countrys values. Today America is flooded with foreign manufactures and our values have indeed been revolutionized. The influence of foreign money, of indebtedness to foreigners, of dependence on foreign oil, hangs over Washington D.C. like a gallows. In 1892 the protective tariff was a mainstay principle of the Republican Party. Congressman McKinley believed that tariffs should be higher, that America needed to maintain its independence; that America would be ruined by free trade. It may be said that McKinley held a classical rather than an economic position. He looked back to ancient wisdom, ignoring the modern economists. It is not that economics is wrong in its principles of efficiency. Merely, economics is one-sided. Economic efficiency is not the be-all and end-all of human existence. And yet, todays politics would leave you with this very impression. Todays political thinking, with its emphasis on globalization, free trade and permeable borders would shock a man like McKinley. The ongoing debasement of Americas currency would illicit, from him, groans of disapproval. He would ask: What do the Americans of 2008 think they are doing?
In 1896 McKinley ran for president on a platform of high tariffs and currency as good as gold. Searching for an explanation for the success of McKinleys policy, which stood in opposition to free trade, I was recently shown an article titled The Influence of Protective Tariffs on the Industrial Development of the United States, first published in May 1940. It was written by the economist Joseph Schumpeter and begins with the following lines: I feel strongly that nothing but confusion and misunderstanding can result from any analysis of the effects of protective tariffs from purely economic considerations
. Free trade is economically efficient, he admitted. Yet national independence is even more fundamental. At the end of his article, Schumpeter penned the following memorable lines: [If] we have got to live in a mercantilist, nationalist, bellicose world dominated by a few great empires, on the one hand, and if the domestic policy of this country is to remain free to shape its own destiny, on the other hand, I do not see the possibility, and I should very much doubt the wisdom, of any major deviation from the policy of protection.
We know the argument for free trade. In the most simplistic terms, free trade intensifies the division of labor. The more advanced the division of labor the wealthier society becomes and the more specialized. We seldom ask, in this context, whether modern specialization makes a better nation or merely makes a more comfortable nation. As a character in a Robert Heinlein novel once quipped: Specialization is for insects. A drone isnt free, and neither is the hive society to which it belongs. The worker ant is hardly self-sufficient. How curious that national self-sufficiency is not equated with national freedom? In opposition to self-sufficiency, our theorists and politicians talk glowingly of interdependence that form of dependency that draws nations and continents together in a process that ultimately promises one world, one global village (a.k.a. globalism).
It is no accident that we are today afflicted with a reason-withering political correctness closing in from all sides. This oppressive ideology pretends that opposing forces can amalgamate under the shaky utopian ramshackle of multiculturalism. To solve the problem of human difference, a counterfeit unity has been conceived. Under the rubric of tolerance we have abandoned our own heritage. McKinley was right when he said that free trade would revolutionize our values.
It has been our mistake to make economics the end-all and be-all. Todays political conceptions refer back to economics, are justified through economics. As a successful political campaign once asserted, Its the economy, stupid. Friedrich Hayek wondered at Aristotles proposition that the ideal order was Autarkos [self sufficiency]. How could the great Aristotle be so ignorant? But have we, in the modern world, built a lasting foundation when all our invention, and all our development, has brought us a runaway bureaucratic mega-system that continually undercuts self-sufficiency?
The ancients taught that history is cyclical. They believed that death was the herald of new life, that every ending signifies a new beginning. Perhaps that is where we are headed: to a new self-sufficiency, independence and rebirth. In order for this to happen the various organs of dependence the nanny state, paper money and mass debt must pass into oblivion.
(end of article)
There are two standards. The princes have told a lie to those who they govern. Our nation has been sold to the highest bidder based on free trade. The princes live in luxury without risk. If they scheme foolish schemes, there is always tax payers money to bail them out...
Two systems supported by a lie...
| 2008/3/31 8:28||Profile|
(Missionaries were murdered by FARC Rebels)
Murders May Lead to Damages Tailspin for Chiquita (Update1)
By Erik Larson and Joshua Goodman
April 2 (Bloomberg) -- Chiquita Brands International Inc., owner of the namesake banana label, may be forced to pay more than $780 million, or $18.20 a share, if found complicit in the murders of five American missionaries by Marxist rebels a decade ago in Colombia.
The missionaries' families sued March 12 in Miami, accusing Chiquita of paying the FARC guerilla group for protection and supplying it with weapons from 1989 to 1997. The case is the first against a U.S. company under a 1992 law allowing Americans to sue U.S. organizations over terrorism deaths abroad. It may reveal whether Chiquita paid the FARC to thwart competition.
The Cincinnati-based company was fined $25 million after pleading guilty a year ago to engaging in transactions with a global terrorist, after paying Colombian paramilitary militias $1.7 million from 1997 to 2004.
``Chiquita's admission that they paid these groups is half the battle,'' said Jean-Charles Brisard, a Lausanne, Switzerland- based consultant on terrorism financing who isn't involved in the case. ``All that's left is for the plaintiffs to prove the much easier claim that the company knew or could've known the FARC was planning to carry out crimes against Americans.''
Chiquita rose 65 percent in the past 12 months, buoyed by expectations the European Union will eliminate the tariff on South American bananas, said Dean Haskell, a Morgan Joseph & Co. analyst who recommends buying Chiquita. The company lost $49 million last year on sales of $4.7 billion. The tariff is 176 euros ($275) a metric ton.
Chiquita today rose 54 cents to $23.45, a one-year high, at 10:55 a.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading.
``Litigation risk is something we keep an eye on as events occur,'' said Alison Sullivan, a credit analyst for Standard & Poor's in New York. Investors haven't focused on the month-old lawsuit, according to Haskell and Will Putnam, an analyst at Matrix USA LLC in New York, whose team on March 27 recommended selling Chiquita.
The suit is the seventh since Chiquita's guilty plea. Four were filed under a different law on behalf of about 600 Colombian FARC victims, seeking at least $11.8 billion in damages. Those cases were consolidated in Miami with two shareholder actions in which Chiquita is accused of harming the company's reputation with the illegal payments.
In a case not involving Chiquita, a Chicago jury in 2004 awarded the family of American teenager David Boim $52 million after finding U.S. Muslim charities financed Palestinians that killed the youth in Israel in 1996. The judge tripled the award to $156 million, as the terrorism law permits.
The Boim verdict was overturned for reasons unconnected to the amount of the award. The U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago said the link between the charities and the shooting wasn't proved. The Boims, U.S. citizens living in Jerusalem, asked the court for a rehearing.
Gary Osen, the lawyer for the missionaries' families, called the Boim verdict ``a good benchmark.'' Damages in his suit probably will be higher for each death, Osen said, meaning the total may exceed $780 million.
That amount ``would be in line with what courts have done in analogous situations,'' Jonathan Drimmer, a Washington attorney and Georgetown University adjunct law professor who has advised plaintiffs and corporate defendants, said in an interview.
The missionaries were kidnapped in 1993 and 1994 and later killed by the FARC, which the U.S. government designated a terrorist organization, the families said in their complaint.
Their case is stronger than the Boims' because it directly links Chiquita's payments to the group's actions, Norman Abrams, a University of California at Los Angeles law professor emeritus, said in an interview.
``If you give money directly to a terrorist, what do they use it for?'' said Abrams, who isn't involved in the suit. ``They use it to buy guns.''
The families accused the grower of prompting attacks on Uniban, the Medellin-based seller of Turbana brand bananas and plantains, soliciting the FARC to burn the competitor's supplies and block its exports.
Chiquita paid the FARC to intimidate labor unions and sabotage competitors as a means of ``squashing competition and assuring defendants of an accommodating labor force,'' the families said.
A Chiquita spokesman said the company was victimized by the FARC and was forced to pay to protect employees. The payments continued after a corporate lawyer strongly advised against them, according to court documents in the criminal case.
`We Were Extorted'
``We were clearly extorted,'' spokesman Ed Loyd said. ``We don't share the ideology of these groups.''
Loyd rejected claims that Chiquita supplied weapons and paid the group to damage the competitor. ``That's not the type of business practice we would engage in,'' he said.
Myles Frechette, 72, U.S. ambassador to Bogota from 1994 to 1997, now a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said Chiquita faced a dilemma.
``It was a devil's choice to pay these criminals or not, given that the Colombian government was incapable of extending the rule of law,'' he said.
Nancy Hamm, 57, whose husband, David Mankins, was seized at their home among the Kuna Indians near the Colombia-Panama border, said the company shouldn't have paid.
``Chiquita had a choice,'' Hamm said by phone from Debary, Florida. ``And they chose at the expense of American lives to go on doing business in an area where they knew terrorists operated.''
(end of article)
Why have those who made these "business" decisions been allowed to remain free? Should they not be experiencing "rendition" for their financial support of terrorism?
| 2008/4/2 12:27||Profile|
Fed 'Bears' mortgage burden
Mortgage securities assumed by Fed as part of Bear Stearns-JPMorgan deal, Treasury letter confirms.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Federal Reserve is taking on mortgage-backed securities and other investments as part of its $29 billion rescue of Bear Stearns, a government official confirmed in a letter to Congress.
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York's loan to JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM, Fortune 500), which has proposed to buy Bear Stearns Cos. (BSC, Fortune 500) in a government-engineered plan, is being secured by a "pool of assets consisting primarily of mortgage backed securities and related hedge investments," said the March 28 letter by Kevin Fromer, the Treasury Department's assistant secretary for legislative affairs.
The letter was released Tuesday by the Senate Finance Committee's staff. It confirmed the widely reported, but yet-to-be officially acknowledged details of last month's agreement.
The Fed extended the lifeline as part of JPMorgan's eleventh-hour deal to buy out the troubled Bear Stearns, the nation's fifth largest investment house.
Supporters of the Fed's role say it was needed to prevent a panic from spreading on Wall Street that could have derailed the overall economy, but some lawmakers have raised concerns that the Fed, and ultimately U.S. taxpayers, could wind up on the hook.
If there are losses on those assets, JPMorgan has agreed to take responsibility for the first $1 billion, with the Fed absorbing the rest.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke met privately Tuesday with House Republicans, a day before he is slated to deliver a fresh assessment of economic conditions to Capitol Hill. Bernanke is scheduled to testify at a 9:30 a.m. EDT hearing of the Joint Economic Committee.
(end of article)
To highlight this article, Morgan has agreed to take responsibility for the first billion dollars of failed securities. Then the taxpayer, who is under free market principles, are responsible for the other 28 billion dollars.
Another double standard...
| 2008/4/3 8:22||Profile|