It should be no secret by now that a cadre of central banksters, politicians and extremely wealthy corporatists have been working to implement a global order which would benefit their interests. The mere knowledge of this causes different reactions in different people. Some will enter a state of denial and claim no such things exist. Others may admit to the existence of such conspiracies, but would claim there was nothing that can be done to stop them. Still others would not only admit to the conspiratorial nature of those at the top, they would explore methods to thwart such plans and prevent humankind from re-entering a feudal serf system. They would try to convince the deniers to join them in their efforts. To these people I say use the gift of imagination that nature has given to the human race.
Those who would conspire to deny humans their basic rights and to life, liberty and property do so in the most devious ways. I have heard it said that the most hopelessly enslaved are those who believe they are free. This is what has happened to humanity in the Western world. Those at the top pulling the strings, the ruling elite as I call them, have created power structures in such a way as to give people the illusion of freedom and self determination while in reality they are a serf class completely dependent on the establishment systems that are in place. They did such a good job that they may well have trapped themselves in their delusional snare.
The world around us has existed for all our lives. We have seen changes, but they have been more or less subtle. Most of the important structures and institutions we have grown accustomed to have been around since before we were born, depending, of course, on your age. We can't imagine life without them. This is, perhaps, at least partially by design. There is much that remains hidden to most behind the hustle and bustle of everyday life. There is much that goes unreported behind the glitz and dazzle of the modern day establishment news media. There is much that remains unknown to the public at large inside the academic industrial complex. In short, there is much that has been kept from the general public so that the current power elite could remain in power, so that the establishment could remain the establishment now and into the future.
Yet power seems to be slipping through the fingers of the establishment. Try as they might to remain a hidden hand, more and more people are looking to where the light is shining and are identifying the culprits that have brought tyranny upon us. It is becoming obvious that those who have failed us, those who are responsible for the current economic debacle and the impending catastrophe, those who are behind the wars and the violence in the world, are the same ones who are pulling the strings of governance. These are the people who have used their vast wealth to corrupt the politicians for their own benefit. These are the people who are trying to consolidate even more power and form a tyrannical centralized world government that they can control.
The illusions are slipping away, reality is coming into focus and the people are moving to reassert their power and demand accountability. The establishment is shaking. It is quite likely they are frightened of the people gaining knowledge. They don't like being exposed. They may be getting ready to panic. Once panicked they are more likely to make mistakes. They will get desperate. Desperation could lead to violence. It is at this point, when they try to force their will upon the masses through violence, that the common folk must measure their reaction and use their imagination to counter such measures, for reacting with violence could well be the biggest mistake possible.
The powers that be have two main weapons, fear and force. Fear prevents people from taking action. It makes them hesitate. They are afraid of the violence that can be brought down upon them. They are afraid of the pain and the damage such violence could cause. They are afraid of the changes that could come to the world they know. Most of all, they are afraid of the unknown. These are fears that need to be overcome if the common folk are to reclaim the power they deserve and their rightful inheritance of liberty. They must speak up against the practices of the power elite and know that their policies are immoral and the principles of freedom are the very essence of morality.
In our efforts to prevent the ruling elite from completing their globalist agenda we have discovered many things that haven't worked. We have seen that voting doesn't work. Too many sheeple don't seem to realize that the two party system is just one party with two faces working for the elite. They don't seem able to comprehend that power corrupts. And when a candidate appears on the scene that is actually honest and not working for the corporate establishment interests, the machinery is put in place to marginalize and discredit him, or the dubious voting machines are put to work to steal the election.
We have seen that the justice system doesn't work. Time and again we have seen the courts make bad rulings and uphold unconstitutional laws. Time and again they have allowed government to trample on individual rights. They have shown that they are not an organization interested in truth and justice so much as an organization devoted to revenue collection and the growth and profit of its own branch of government. The justice system, while it will bring individuals who have harmed others to justice and rule in favor of individual rights every so often for public relation purposes, is more than willing to throw people who have harmed no one into a cold cell simply for dissenting, believing they own their own bodies, or objecting to the opinions and policies of those in power. Once again we see a system where people go along to get along due to fear of imprisonment and the power the system has over them.
We have seen that protests have mixed results. While they might get a "win" for some minor issue or another every once in awhile, the major issues remain unassailable and the globalists move forward with their centralization agenda. We have seen movements co-opted by powerful groups with political agendas of their own. We have seen that politicians don't really listen to or honor the message of the protests. They hear it, and then they pay it lip service, but they do nothing substantial about it if that message contradicts the wishes of the establishment ruling elite. They spin the message until its original meaning is twisted and lost in obfuscation. Lately they have even blatantly lied, making promises to adhere to a message or principle and then doing exactly the opposite of what they promised. They care not for democracy or the opinions of a vocal group, they care only for the wishes of those with the money, those with the real power.
We have seen that violence doesn't work. Violence is their strong suit, not ours. If there's one thing that governments do really well, it's violence. They have spent their fortunes figuring out bigger and better ways to kill and destroy. We think of weapons, for the most part, in terms of self defense. Violence will just beget more violence. In a violent political struggle, the winner is just the more powerful of two violent gangs. The common folk are going to be ruled over by one violent gang or another.
It may seem like the ruling elite hold all the cards, but they have no imagination. They simply keep repeating their old tricks, as they have for ages, hoping we won't learn, hoping we're too distracted to notice. This is why we need to use our imaginations. We need to innovate to figure out peaceable ways to reassert our power and hold them accountable. A couple of things we do have, we have the ability to say no. We have love, empathy and the ability to help each other. We can say "no" to their dictates and refuse to follow their orders. We can tell them we've had enough of their tyranny and refuse to harm our fellow humans as they attempt to divide and conquer. We can help those who actively dissent and help to set up organizations that will provide needed services when the establishment organizations can no longer function.
We can continue to expose them for the criminals they are. The corporate globalist elite and those who support them understand that what they are doing is wrong. Continue rolling the video during any encounter you might have with those who claim any kind of "authority" over you. Video any public encounter you may have with any sort of public figure associated with the corporate establishment. Watch them scurry as the light is shone upon them. Very few people like bullies. Almost nobody appreciates being coerced into paying for services they don't want to use, or for very poor customer service. Shaming those who engage in such activity is quite important. I think exposure is one of the things the globalists fear most.
I'm sure there are far more innovative ways of being civilly disobedient and asserting your freedom and independence. It is up to you to find and apply such methods. We are all moving into the future and that future does include global economics and commerce, the question is who will control it? Will we all be able to interact on a voluntary level, or will we be forced to do business through a few elite controlling monopolistic power structures? Will we be able to make our own decisions as to what we consume, or will we have to ask permission from a few control freaks at the top as to what we can and cannot purchase? Will we be able to freely associate with whoever we want, or will we be forced to interface with some unfeeling bureaucracy in some unknown place? The answer lies in you and how you choose to live your life, for that is where you exercise the most control.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Co-opting the Populist Majorities
I have stated before that I am happy to see the "Occupy Wall Street" movement moving forward and turning into something bigger. I am happy to see it gain momentum and migrate to other areas. The American people, like people all over the world, are angry with the ruling classes and are voicing their discontent. Whether the oligarchs have planned and/or financed the populist movements that have popped up lately I don't know, but it seems to me that it would be prudent for them to try to infiltrate such movements and obtain leadership positions so that they can steer them in directions they want them to go.
As with the tea party movement that was co-opted by the right, or the Republicans, so the left, or the Democrats, is co-opting the Occupy Wall Street movement, or at least trying to. Like the Tea Party movement, the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to be a decentralized grass roots effort without leadership or direction, just a protest meant to show the establishment the anger felt by the common folk. The people have shown that they know the system is broken and they want it fixed, but there are many divergent views as to exactly what about the system is broken and how to fix it. As often happens, there are many who attempt to take leadership upon themselves and instill their own vision of what should be and how to achieve that vision into the movement.
It seems to me that people have a tendency to do as little work as possible. Unfortunately, this also appears to be true when it comes to thinking. There are, however, those who are willing to do the thinking for everyone so long as they believe they'll gain something from it. I believe it is therefore important to expose as many people who are taking part in these protests to as many perspectives and ideas as possible. I believe it is important for all individuals to think for themselves and internalize as much information as possible to form their opinions.
It seems to me that many people taking part in these movements self identify with certain groups that may have gripes with other groups. This makes it easier for the establishment to use the strategy of divide and conquer to destabilize popular movements. A good example of this is business owners versus employees. Just because one owns a business doesn't make one rich or successful. Even those who are well off, very successful and look extremely wealthy, whether incorporated or not, can't really be compared to the huge, international corporations that have formed the backbone of the establishment. Yet there are those who would believe such successful businessmen are part of the elite ruling class. It seems to me that the differences and lack of understanding between these two groups can make it difficult for one to empathize with the other.
The problems that have become prevalent in this nation today aren't about left or right, Democrat or Republican, or conservative or liberal. The differences in these philosophies are miniscule for the most part. The problems are about liberty or tyranny. When government harasses, intimidates and jails the populace, that is tyranny. When people are able to peacefully go about their lives and their business without fear of official government intrusion and retribution, that is liberty. I believe that most people, despite what they might say about wanting freebees, simply wish to be left alone and would be happy to live in an economic environment that provided opportunity. I believe that most people, though they may not know it, would be pleased with free market solutions that would hold businesses accountable for their mistakes and create a competitive environment that rewarded and invited hard work and innovation.
This is not what we have in our nation today. What we have in a way is unique, and yet it has been tried in various iterations throughout history. It is the unholy marriage of big government, the huge established international corporations, and the central banking cartel pulling the strings. It can be called fascism, corporatism, an oligarchy, a plutocracy, etc., but there hasn't been a free market in this nation for a long, long time, if indeed there ever was a true free market. It is, in my humble opinion, the insistence on looking to the federal government to help regulate the marketplace that has enabled it to become the leviathan it is today and given it its ability to create market monopolies that could not otherwise exist.
I have found that there are a number of things that point to evidence that a given person or organization is trying to co-opt a movement and implant an agenda into it, especially if they are claiming a leadership or financial role to officially represent the diversified people involved in the movement. The first is a claim that more taxes are necessary. More taxes amount to more government. It is tantamount to asking the already over bloated federal government to grow even larger. Higher taxes on the rich is just a wealth redistribution scheme and could even send them fleeing from the country, taking jobs with them. Less spending is what is needed. Stopping hostilities in occupied nations and bringing troops home would be a good start and would save trillions. Whatever happened to the anti war movement anyway and why isn't it being cranked back up at these new Occupy Wall Street protests? I thought the left was supposed to despise war.
Another thing I'm leery of are efforts to insist on intervention and oversight from world organizations. America can take care of itself and its own problems. We do not need oversight from world organizations. We do not need a one world government. One world government would not be a touchy, feely, loving thing. It would involve more centralization, grander corruption and more money wasted on unnecessary bureaucracies that chew up and spit out little guys while letting the huge corporate interests get away with murder. It would mean more wealth, privilege, autonomy and immunity for the already super wealthy elite and more unjust restriction for the common folk while their rights are disrespected and eroded away. What is really needed is decentralization and more emphasis on local structures where problems are better understood, they can better be held accountable and individual rights are more likely to be taken into account.
Another thing to watch out for are people agitating for violence. I am quite happy to see Occupy Wall Street remaining a peaceful vigil as that movement had the capacity to blow up early on. People need to be aware of agent provocateurs in their midst. I understand that it is easy to get frustrated at the seeming lack of progress when it comes to changing the economic conditions. No one in power seems to be listening to the common folk, but they have been hearing the clamor coming from the street recently. Remember this, it is not the politicians that are changing things, it is the protesting and the threat of civil disobedience that is having the greatest effect. Violence never solved anything.
The other thing that bothers me is the entitlement mentality. I cringe when I hear someone asking to be given something for nothing. It seems that too many don't realize that in order to get something from the government, it had to be taken from someone else by force of taxation. Taxation is neither voluntary nor free from coercion as the powers that be would have you believe. People don't seem to realize that in order to get some form of service for free the people who provide that service have to become slavish. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone paid for it. In the current system we have, in order to benefit some, economic harm has to be done to others.
I understand that billions were given to the elite uber rich in the form of bailouts, and I understand the "I want mine" attitude, but two wrongs don't make a right. Personally, I think we'd have been better off if the lower classes had been bailed out rather than the elite banking cartel. This action has helped the super rich in a couple of ways. It has given them the liquidity they needed to cover up their criminal dealings while providing them with a way to pit the upper middle class taxpayers against the poor welfare class. The problem the ruling class might be having now is that I believe a lot more people have figured this out than they might have counted on.
Finally, I'd be wary of Republican and Democrat politicians jumping in front of the parade and wanting to pass new laws. With a few exceptions, politicians are mostly part of the problem and I don't believe they're going to be part of the answer, certainly not the batch of establishment globalist cronies we have in there now. We need laws repealed, not further restrictions imposed, in order to give entrepreneurs freer reign and grease the gears of economic growth. Perhaps if during the next couple of election cycles we can replace the current incumbents with more liberty oriented, smaller government folks things will be different. Until such a time, I think it is safe to assume that most politicians jumping on the bandwagon to make grand speeches to these movements are doing so for their own benefit, to get elected and to promote their corporate big government agendas.
If there's one thing the ruling class can't have, it's successful populist movements. They will try their best to co-opt such movements and make them irrelevant. It is therefore helpful to identify issues agreed upon by different movements and join together where possible. One such issue is the Federal Reserve. Both the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street crowds have identified this monolithic organization as a main source of our current economic troubles. Auditing, investigating, changing and even eliminating this failed institution should continue to be a mantra coming from all sides. Those who have participated in or enabled fraudulent and unethical behavior in the banking industry should be held accountable for their criminal activities and should be forced to make things right even if they have to lose their own massive fortunes doing so.
The other thing I believe most people would agree with is that business and personal relationships should be voluntary in nature. We need to recognize that government as it is run today is far from voluntary. It has been said many times that government is a monopoly on the use of force. Even Barrack Obama has said so. This force either prevents people from engaging in activities they want to engage in or makes them engage in behavior they don't want to engage in. The problem is that thousands, perhaps millions, of laws have been written that prevent people from engaging in behaviors that may be beneficial to them or that force them to engage in behaviors that may be harmful to them. In short, governments in general and the federal government in particular have overstepped their bounds far too often and the common folk are finally showing their displeasure.
It is my hope that populist movements don't succumb to establishment co-opting. I think it is important to keep putting out the message of freedom into these movements. I hope that more people are coming to understand this message and how important it is to become the free society that was the dream of some of the founders of this nation. Should the principles of freedom and liberty once again take hold in this nation and come to flourish and bloom, I think we will see such prosperity as is difficult to imagine.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
As with the tea party movement that was co-opted by the right, or the Republicans, so the left, or the Democrats, is co-opting the Occupy Wall Street movement, or at least trying to. Like the Tea Party movement, the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to be a decentralized grass roots effort without leadership or direction, just a protest meant to show the establishment the anger felt by the common folk. The people have shown that they know the system is broken and they want it fixed, but there are many divergent views as to exactly what about the system is broken and how to fix it. As often happens, there are many who attempt to take leadership upon themselves and instill their own vision of what should be and how to achieve that vision into the movement.
It seems to me that people have a tendency to do as little work as possible. Unfortunately, this also appears to be true when it comes to thinking. There are, however, those who are willing to do the thinking for everyone so long as they believe they'll gain something from it. I believe it is therefore important to expose as many people who are taking part in these protests to as many perspectives and ideas as possible. I believe it is important for all individuals to think for themselves and internalize as much information as possible to form their opinions.
It seems to me that many people taking part in these movements self identify with certain groups that may have gripes with other groups. This makes it easier for the establishment to use the strategy of divide and conquer to destabilize popular movements. A good example of this is business owners versus employees. Just because one owns a business doesn't make one rich or successful. Even those who are well off, very successful and look extremely wealthy, whether incorporated or not, can't really be compared to the huge, international corporations that have formed the backbone of the establishment. Yet there are those who would believe such successful businessmen are part of the elite ruling class. It seems to me that the differences and lack of understanding between these two groups can make it difficult for one to empathize with the other.
The problems that have become prevalent in this nation today aren't about left or right, Democrat or Republican, or conservative or liberal. The differences in these philosophies are miniscule for the most part. The problems are about liberty or tyranny. When government harasses, intimidates and jails the populace, that is tyranny. When people are able to peacefully go about their lives and their business without fear of official government intrusion and retribution, that is liberty. I believe that most people, despite what they might say about wanting freebees, simply wish to be left alone and would be happy to live in an economic environment that provided opportunity. I believe that most people, though they may not know it, would be pleased with free market solutions that would hold businesses accountable for their mistakes and create a competitive environment that rewarded and invited hard work and innovation.
This is not what we have in our nation today. What we have in a way is unique, and yet it has been tried in various iterations throughout history. It is the unholy marriage of big government, the huge established international corporations, and the central banking cartel pulling the strings. It can be called fascism, corporatism, an oligarchy, a plutocracy, etc., but there hasn't been a free market in this nation for a long, long time, if indeed there ever was a true free market. It is, in my humble opinion, the insistence on looking to the federal government to help regulate the marketplace that has enabled it to become the leviathan it is today and given it its ability to create market monopolies that could not otherwise exist.
I have found that there are a number of things that point to evidence that a given person or organization is trying to co-opt a movement and implant an agenda into it, especially if they are claiming a leadership or financial role to officially represent the diversified people involved in the movement. The first is a claim that more taxes are necessary. More taxes amount to more government. It is tantamount to asking the already over bloated federal government to grow even larger. Higher taxes on the rich is just a wealth redistribution scheme and could even send them fleeing from the country, taking jobs with them. Less spending is what is needed. Stopping hostilities in occupied nations and bringing troops home would be a good start and would save trillions. Whatever happened to the anti war movement anyway and why isn't it being cranked back up at these new Occupy Wall Street protests? I thought the left was supposed to despise war.
Another thing I'm leery of are efforts to insist on intervention and oversight from world organizations. America can take care of itself and its own problems. We do not need oversight from world organizations. We do not need a one world government. One world government would not be a touchy, feely, loving thing. It would involve more centralization, grander corruption and more money wasted on unnecessary bureaucracies that chew up and spit out little guys while letting the huge corporate interests get away with murder. It would mean more wealth, privilege, autonomy and immunity for the already super wealthy elite and more unjust restriction for the common folk while their rights are disrespected and eroded away. What is really needed is decentralization and more emphasis on local structures where problems are better understood, they can better be held accountable and individual rights are more likely to be taken into account.
Another thing to watch out for are people agitating for violence. I am quite happy to see Occupy Wall Street remaining a peaceful vigil as that movement had the capacity to blow up early on. People need to be aware of agent provocateurs in their midst. I understand that it is easy to get frustrated at the seeming lack of progress when it comes to changing the economic conditions. No one in power seems to be listening to the common folk, but they have been hearing the clamor coming from the street recently. Remember this, it is not the politicians that are changing things, it is the protesting and the threat of civil disobedience that is having the greatest effect. Violence never solved anything.
The other thing that bothers me is the entitlement mentality. I cringe when I hear someone asking to be given something for nothing. It seems that too many don't realize that in order to get something from the government, it had to be taken from someone else by force of taxation. Taxation is neither voluntary nor free from coercion as the powers that be would have you believe. People don't seem to realize that in order to get some form of service for free the people who provide that service have to become slavish. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone paid for it. In the current system we have, in order to benefit some, economic harm has to be done to others.
I understand that billions were given to the elite uber rich in the form of bailouts, and I understand the "I want mine" attitude, but two wrongs don't make a right. Personally, I think we'd have been better off if the lower classes had been bailed out rather than the elite banking cartel. This action has helped the super rich in a couple of ways. It has given them the liquidity they needed to cover up their criminal dealings while providing them with a way to pit the upper middle class taxpayers against the poor welfare class. The problem the ruling class might be having now is that I believe a lot more people have figured this out than they might have counted on.
Finally, I'd be wary of Republican and Democrat politicians jumping in front of the parade and wanting to pass new laws. With a few exceptions, politicians are mostly part of the problem and I don't believe they're going to be part of the answer, certainly not the batch of establishment globalist cronies we have in there now. We need laws repealed, not further restrictions imposed, in order to give entrepreneurs freer reign and grease the gears of economic growth. Perhaps if during the next couple of election cycles we can replace the current incumbents with more liberty oriented, smaller government folks things will be different. Until such a time, I think it is safe to assume that most politicians jumping on the bandwagon to make grand speeches to these movements are doing so for their own benefit, to get elected and to promote their corporate big government agendas.
If there's one thing the ruling class can't have, it's successful populist movements. They will try their best to co-opt such movements and make them irrelevant. It is therefore helpful to identify issues agreed upon by different movements and join together where possible. One such issue is the Federal Reserve. Both the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street crowds have identified this monolithic organization as a main source of our current economic troubles. Auditing, investigating, changing and even eliminating this failed institution should continue to be a mantra coming from all sides. Those who have participated in or enabled fraudulent and unethical behavior in the banking industry should be held accountable for their criminal activities and should be forced to make things right even if they have to lose their own massive fortunes doing so.
The other thing I believe most people would agree with is that business and personal relationships should be voluntary in nature. We need to recognize that government as it is run today is far from voluntary. It has been said many times that government is a monopoly on the use of force. Even Barrack Obama has said so. This force either prevents people from engaging in activities they want to engage in or makes them engage in behavior they don't want to engage in. The problem is that thousands, perhaps millions, of laws have been written that prevent people from engaging in behaviors that may be beneficial to them or that force them to engage in behaviors that may be harmful to them. In short, governments in general and the federal government in particular have overstepped their bounds far too often and the common folk are finally showing their displeasure.
It is my hope that populist movements don't succumb to establishment co-opting. I think it is important to keep putting out the message of freedom into these movements. I hope that more people are coming to understand this message and how important it is to become the free society that was the dream of some of the founders of this nation. Should the principles of freedom and liberty once again take hold in this nation and come to flourish and bloom, I think we will see such prosperity as is difficult to imagine.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
999 is 666 Upside Down and Backward
"Let me tell you how it will be,
There's one for you, nineteen for me...
...Don't ask me what I want it for,
If you don't want to pay some more
Cause I'm the taxman,
Yeah, I'm the taxman."
From Taxman by The Beatles
No, I'm not claiming that Herman Cain is the Antichrist, though I'm sure that there are many others who will. I will say, however, that I'm scratching my head wondering how he got so popular promoting such a lame tax scheme. Are there really that many people who will fall for such a propagandistic gimmick? Are there really that many people who don't know how taxes work? Are there really that many people that don't understand that this is a tax increase for everyone? My guess is that the media is exaggerating Mr. Cain's popularity just as they are understating Dr. Paul's. I think the establishment is running scared at Ron Paul's popularity and so they commanded their corporate media lackeys to promote this guy as the next great messiah or some such thing.
If you haven't figured it out by now, the establishment wants to keep someone it can control in the White House, but it doesn't want you to think the president is controlled. They know that Ron Paul is too principled and wants to use the Constitution as a legal tool to force establishment entities to relinquish some of their power. His record shows he can't be bought off and he will likely deliver true change at least when it comes to how the executive branch of the government is run. With Ron Paul's surge in popularity and the ideas of freedom beginning to catch on, the establishment needs someone they can present to the Republican base as someone in tune with Republican concerns. It seems they've already given up on Mitt Romney with his Romneycare so similar to Obamacare and Rick Perry with his mandated vaccines and obvious globalist connections.
Looking at Herman Cain's past, it isn't hard to figure out who he really represents. From 1989 to 1996 he worked on the Omaha Branch Board, as a Deputy Chairman and as a Chairman respectively for the Kansas City branch of the Federal Reserve. Need I say more? This man reeks of establishment. He says the right things to appeal to the conservative base, but has no voting record to help determine whether he will stand by his views or if he's just paying lip service to conservative values. In this respect, he is a nebulous political figure much like Barrack Obama was in 2008. If nothing else, he certainly has shown that he loves taxes and that intimates to me that he'd as soon raise your taxes rather than cut spending.
What's more concerning to me than the more obtuse issue of where Mr. Cain's money comes from and who he represents is his insistence that more taxation is a viable solution for problems created by government excess and greed. While it is true that I am notorious for being anti income tax and believing the only fair tax is no tax, I wouldn't be so quick to speak out against a plan that actually reduced the tax burden of the common folk. Mr. Cain's 999 tax plan is not a tax break for anyone, and it is most definitely an increase for the poorest Americans. Right on it's surface it ensures that close to 27% of everyone's income will go to the federal government. That's in addition to property, state and local taxes that everyone pays. Too many people can't afford such an increase.
For those that might be unfamiliar with Mr. Cain's plan, he wishes to implement a 9% corporate tax rate, a 9% flat income tax rate, and a 9% national sales tax. Some of you might be thinking that Mr. Cain's plan only ensures that one would pay nine percent of his income to the federal government based on the nine percent income tax portion of his plan. Well, consider this, do you think that corporations are going to just accept a 9% hit to their bottom line and not do anything about it? I very much doubt that. I would venture to guess that such an increase in their costs would be passed onto you. It might not happen right away, but eventually the consumer will pay for the tax increase through higher prices. While one could make the legitimate claim that one can avoid this tax by not doing business with corporations, the reality is that corporations are so pervasive in this country that only a miniscule number of people would actually be able to accomplish such a feat.
As for income tax rates, according to the Tax Foundation the median percentage of income tax paid for the lowest half of earners in 2008 was 2.59%. There's no doubt here that these people would suffer a significant tax increase on this alone should Mr. Cain's plan be implemented. The top 50% paid a median income tax of 13.65%. A couple of things to keep in mind. The figures above are for adjusted gross income. Mr. Cain's plan, as far as I can tell, would be based simply upon gross income, so depending upon the numbers one paying 13.65% tax on adjusted gross might be paying less than 9% gross. Another consideration is that the top 50% median is greatly pulled up by the top 10% or so who pay much higher income tax rates then most of us. This tax plan would be a tax cut for those people. Once again we see a tax cut for the very rich who can most afford it and a tax increase for the poor. Kind of makes one wonder why anyone who isn't worth millions or tens of millions would support such a plan.
Lastly let's look at the 9% sales tax. Honestly, can you afford to pay 9% more for everything you purchase? This makes one wonder if Herman Cain has gone to the grocery store recently, or ever. Of course, a similar argument could be made here as above that one could avoid this tax by not doing business, but how many of us have the means and the ability to produce food, shelter, clothes and the essentials for life? That's not including all the nice modern conveniences that make life so much easier and enjoyable. With lower income people everywhere already having to make tough choices between things like medicine or food, heat or rent, etc., why would anyone think it would be a good idea to take another 9% of their income to give to the federal government and make it that much tougher for the already dispossessed to survive?
I've said it more than once and I'll say it again, to me taxes are theft. They are a form of extortion. One could say they are legalized, legitimized theft to help pay for socialized services provided by a monopolistic organization called the federal government. I say theft is theft no matter the excuses, no matter how covert. They more or less turn the populace into a quivering slavish mass of humanity too fearful to withhold their funds from the behemoth that has become the federal government no matter how much they disagree with the policies practiced by that organization.
There are those who would claim that we all need to "pay our fair share" for government services we all benefit from, and personally I wouldn't mind doing so if I felt I was getting fair value for the money I spend and if I didn't feel threatened and coerced to do so. If their services are so great than why can't they collect money on a voluntary basis like the rest of us? The problem is that I feel, as do many others, that many of the services provided by the federal government are not valuable, yet if I don't pay for them through my income taxes I will be audited and threatened with fees, fines, jail or worse. I've seen in my lifetime a lot of people whose lives have been ruined by the IRS, and the IRS never have to answer for their crimes.
A program like 999 is 666 upside down and backward. The fact that so many are touting this as a viable solution to our economic problems shows how misleading a successful marketing campaign can be. The little 999 mantra reminds me a little of the "hope" and "change" mantra I heard during the 2008 presidential campaign. It is not the mark of the beast which you will need before you can buy or sell anything, but it could become the law of the land that you will have to pay for to feed the beast known as the federal government. It doesn't mean that Mr. Herman Cain is the antichrist, but it does show how centralized government has become more anti Christ like. They don't care if they mark you or not, as long as they get their money. They don't care if you protest or not, as long as you continue to pay their taxes. They don't even care who you vote for, as long as they continue to pull the strings.
Herman Cain might understand that what is needed is less spending and a smaller federal government, but he is not the one who will manifest such changes. He wants to keep the status quo. He wants to keep growing the centralized federal government, to keep empowering Washington, DC, and to keep the populace obedient. He is just another control freak, big government politician that will say and do anything to get elected. Ron Paul is still the best candidate for instilling worthwhile change in government policies. He understands that the federal government is already too big. He understands that the federal reserve needs to be audited and that the income tax and the IRS need to be eliminated. Vote against the backward and upside down 666. End the fed. End the wars. End the income tax. Vote for Ron Paul.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
There's one for you, nineteen for me...
...Don't ask me what I want it for,
If you don't want to pay some more
Cause I'm the taxman,
Yeah, I'm the taxman."
From Taxman by The Beatles
No, I'm not claiming that Herman Cain is the Antichrist, though I'm sure that there are many others who will. I will say, however, that I'm scratching my head wondering how he got so popular promoting such a lame tax scheme. Are there really that many people who will fall for such a propagandistic gimmick? Are there really that many people who don't know how taxes work? Are there really that many people that don't understand that this is a tax increase for everyone? My guess is that the media is exaggerating Mr. Cain's popularity just as they are understating Dr. Paul's. I think the establishment is running scared at Ron Paul's popularity and so they commanded their corporate media lackeys to promote this guy as the next great messiah or some such thing.
If you haven't figured it out by now, the establishment wants to keep someone it can control in the White House, but it doesn't want you to think the president is controlled. They know that Ron Paul is too principled and wants to use the Constitution as a legal tool to force establishment entities to relinquish some of their power. His record shows he can't be bought off and he will likely deliver true change at least when it comes to how the executive branch of the government is run. With Ron Paul's surge in popularity and the ideas of freedom beginning to catch on, the establishment needs someone they can present to the Republican base as someone in tune with Republican concerns. It seems they've already given up on Mitt Romney with his Romneycare so similar to Obamacare and Rick Perry with his mandated vaccines and obvious globalist connections.
Looking at Herman Cain's past, it isn't hard to figure out who he really represents. From 1989 to 1996 he worked on the Omaha Branch Board, as a Deputy Chairman and as a Chairman respectively for the Kansas City branch of the Federal Reserve. Need I say more? This man reeks of establishment. He says the right things to appeal to the conservative base, but has no voting record to help determine whether he will stand by his views or if he's just paying lip service to conservative values. In this respect, he is a nebulous political figure much like Barrack Obama was in 2008. If nothing else, he certainly has shown that he loves taxes and that intimates to me that he'd as soon raise your taxes rather than cut spending.
What's more concerning to me than the more obtuse issue of where Mr. Cain's money comes from and who he represents is his insistence that more taxation is a viable solution for problems created by government excess and greed. While it is true that I am notorious for being anti income tax and believing the only fair tax is no tax, I wouldn't be so quick to speak out against a plan that actually reduced the tax burden of the common folk. Mr. Cain's 999 tax plan is not a tax break for anyone, and it is most definitely an increase for the poorest Americans. Right on it's surface it ensures that close to 27% of everyone's income will go to the federal government. That's in addition to property, state and local taxes that everyone pays. Too many people can't afford such an increase.
For those that might be unfamiliar with Mr. Cain's plan, he wishes to implement a 9% corporate tax rate, a 9% flat income tax rate, and a 9% national sales tax. Some of you might be thinking that Mr. Cain's plan only ensures that one would pay nine percent of his income to the federal government based on the nine percent income tax portion of his plan. Well, consider this, do you think that corporations are going to just accept a 9% hit to their bottom line and not do anything about it? I very much doubt that. I would venture to guess that such an increase in their costs would be passed onto you. It might not happen right away, but eventually the consumer will pay for the tax increase through higher prices. While one could make the legitimate claim that one can avoid this tax by not doing business with corporations, the reality is that corporations are so pervasive in this country that only a miniscule number of people would actually be able to accomplish such a feat.
As for income tax rates, according to the Tax Foundation the median percentage of income tax paid for the lowest half of earners in 2008 was 2.59%. There's no doubt here that these people would suffer a significant tax increase on this alone should Mr. Cain's plan be implemented. The top 50% paid a median income tax of 13.65%. A couple of things to keep in mind. The figures above are for adjusted gross income. Mr. Cain's plan, as far as I can tell, would be based simply upon gross income, so depending upon the numbers one paying 13.65% tax on adjusted gross might be paying less than 9% gross. Another consideration is that the top 50% median is greatly pulled up by the top 10% or so who pay much higher income tax rates then most of us. This tax plan would be a tax cut for those people. Once again we see a tax cut for the very rich who can most afford it and a tax increase for the poor. Kind of makes one wonder why anyone who isn't worth millions or tens of millions would support such a plan.
Lastly let's look at the 9% sales tax. Honestly, can you afford to pay 9% more for everything you purchase? This makes one wonder if Herman Cain has gone to the grocery store recently, or ever. Of course, a similar argument could be made here as above that one could avoid this tax by not doing business, but how many of us have the means and the ability to produce food, shelter, clothes and the essentials for life? That's not including all the nice modern conveniences that make life so much easier and enjoyable. With lower income people everywhere already having to make tough choices between things like medicine or food, heat or rent, etc., why would anyone think it would be a good idea to take another 9% of their income to give to the federal government and make it that much tougher for the already dispossessed to survive?
I've said it more than once and I'll say it again, to me taxes are theft. They are a form of extortion. One could say they are legalized, legitimized theft to help pay for socialized services provided by a monopolistic organization called the federal government. I say theft is theft no matter the excuses, no matter how covert. They more or less turn the populace into a quivering slavish mass of humanity too fearful to withhold their funds from the behemoth that has become the federal government no matter how much they disagree with the policies practiced by that organization.
There are those who would claim that we all need to "pay our fair share" for government services we all benefit from, and personally I wouldn't mind doing so if I felt I was getting fair value for the money I spend and if I didn't feel threatened and coerced to do so. If their services are so great than why can't they collect money on a voluntary basis like the rest of us? The problem is that I feel, as do many others, that many of the services provided by the federal government are not valuable, yet if I don't pay for them through my income taxes I will be audited and threatened with fees, fines, jail or worse. I've seen in my lifetime a lot of people whose lives have been ruined by the IRS, and the IRS never have to answer for their crimes.
A program like 999 is 666 upside down and backward. The fact that so many are touting this as a viable solution to our economic problems shows how misleading a successful marketing campaign can be. The little 999 mantra reminds me a little of the "hope" and "change" mantra I heard during the 2008 presidential campaign. It is not the mark of the beast which you will need before you can buy or sell anything, but it could become the law of the land that you will have to pay for to feed the beast known as the federal government. It doesn't mean that Mr. Herman Cain is the antichrist, but it does show how centralized government has become more anti Christ like. They don't care if they mark you or not, as long as they get their money. They don't care if you protest or not, as long as you continue to pay their taxes. They don't even care who you vote for, as long as they continue to pull the strings.
Herman Cain might understand that what is needed is less spending and a smaller federal government, but he is not the one who will manifest such changes. He wants to keep the status quo. He wants to keep growing the centralized federal government, to keep empowering Washington, DC, and to keep the populace obedient. He is just another control freak, big government politician that will say and do anything to get elected. Ron Paul is still the best candidate for instilling worthwhile change in government policies. He understands that the federal government is already too big. He understands that the federal reserve needs to be audited and that the income tax and the IRS need to be eliminated. Vote against the backward and upside down 666. End the fed. End the wars. End the income tax. Vote for Ron Paul.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
The Fed, Economic Growth and Economic Stability
With all that's going on in the world today I thought it might be interesting to take a step back and consider the question "How did we get here?" I know that at times it might seem like I harp on the subject, but I believe it is an important one. Sometimes, we don't know how far back into antiquity some ideas go. Often times I am surprised when I find out just how long ago certain knowledge was gained. It seems to me that there is not only truth to the saying that he who doesn't know history is doomed to repeat it, but I think that perhaps those who know history can manipulate those who don't and profit from their knowledge coupled with others' ignorance.
History, to me, is more than just names and dates and a series of events that happened on a timeline. It is more than just a linear progression. It is not two dimensional to be looked at simply in terms of cause and effect. It is like a diamond, like a clear multi-faceted crystal that can be examined in a multitude of ways from nearly infinite perspectives. To get a more accurate view of history it is important to examine as many of these perspectives and facets as possible. By doing so we can gain insight into the inner workings of mankind's psychology, particularly at the different class levels as they existed then and as they exist now. It is also important to examine the things that didn't happen, the would've beens and could've beens that never were. In this way we exercise our imaginations to help us evaluate present and future decisions for our personal lives going forward.
For the purpose of brevity, I don't want to go too far back into the past. I would like to mention a couple of points, however. The first is that money has been around for a very, very long time. It originated out of a need to represent the labor needed to produce certain products for trade for a more efficient barter system. The second is that the manipulation of money has been around for nearly as long as money has. Since money was usually coined from precious metals, it wasn't long before people figured out how to shave coins and debase the metals for their own profit while making the money worth less for the common folk. Such practices were quickly recognized as fraudulent, a form of stealing, and laws were enacted to attempt to prevent people from engaging in such practices.
The third point I'd like to mention is that paper money originated long ago in the form of receipts for gold deposited in the safes of local goldsmiths. In this way, the goldsmiths soon became the world's first bankers of sorts. Some of them soon discovered that the receipts they gave out were, in fact, as good as gold. They noticed that only a certain percentage of their costumers at any one time would come back soon and claim their gold, so they began to give out a certain percentage more receipts than they had gold, a practice very much like what is known today as fractional reserve. This made them very wealthy. It didn't take long, however, for the people to recognize the fraudulent nature of this practice and demand an end to it. Theft is theft whether done through covert or overt means.
This brings us to fiat money. It seems that with wealth comes power and influence. At some point, the wealthy bankers were able to convince the royalty of Europe to team up with them, so to speak. It wasn't hard to see the advantage this would have for both those classes of society as they could siphon off the wealth of the working, productive class and move it to the parasitic ruling class without direct taxation which most people oppose. Many people believe that fiat money is synonymous with paper money, but this is not so. Fiat money merely means money by decree, or money that law says must be accepted as a token of exchange when conducting trade. If a government passed a law requiring maple leaves to be used as tokens of exchange when conducting trade, then maple leaves would become legal tender and one could gather up maple leaves as one sees fit and use them at local merchants to purchase goods and services. If a merchant refused to take the maple leaves, the consumer could report that merchant to the local authorities and the merchant could be arrested and thrown in jail. This would remain so as long as the populace believed their government to be legitimate.
Fast forward to 1913. It was near the end of this year, actually closer to 1914, that the Federal Reserve act was passed. It is interesting to note that this act was not passed until after the 16th amendment to the Constitution was ratified, which happened earlier in Feb. 1913. This was, in my opinion, the most significant event of the 20th century. It was the creation of a semi-private, quasi-governmental central bank in the United States of America. It came about despite the dismantling of central banks in this nation twice in its young history. It came about despite the debates that had been going on since the inception of the nation. It came about despite the pragmatic arguments against letting such an institution take hold in our nation. It came about despite Constitutional law that forbade such an enterprise. It came about and legalized practices that had already been recognized as fraudulent centuries before.
There also was much secrecy surrounding the creation of the Federal Reserve. It seems to me that the population at the time was much more aware of the dangers of central banking than it is today. In order to gain the public trust those who would most benefit from such a system, the same oligarchic families that are involved in it today, had to resort to a great deal of deception and unethical means. These men knew what they were doing and they knew it was unsavory, that's why they wanted to remain hidden and they wanted the public misinformed. They knew their eventual goal would be to create a fiat paper currency that would slowly but surely steal the purchasing power of the common folk. In the meantime, as their system moved the economy toward inevitable collapse, they and their descendents would acquire an incredible amount of the real wealth in the world.
My favorite illustration of how this works follows. Let's say you had a rich great grandfather who had an extra two hundred thousand dollars he didn't know what to do with back in 1914. This was a very hefty sum back then, and he figured it was much more than was necessary to keep a family going for many generations. At the outbreak of WWI, (which coincidentally started not long after the passing of the Federal Reserve Act) he becomes uncertain as to the fate of mankind and so he decides to bury it in the backyard. He divides the money in half and puts a hundred thousand in cash in one box and buys a hundred thousand in physical gold bullion which he buries in another box. Not long after he dies and the two boxes are forgotten as he takes their hiding place to the grave, not that it matters as his estate is quite large even without it.
Now, let's say that you inherit his estate. You spot a place that looks like it might make a good rose garden and lo and behold you dig up the two boxes as you get to work. The cash, taken at face value, has lost an extreme amount of buying power. Consider that one could buy a loaf of bread for a nickel or less in 1914, a Ford Model T would cost one $99 dollars and a very nice house would cost one three thousand dollars or less. I'm not sure but I would guess that mansions would run from ten to thirty thousand. Although a hundred grand is still a good chunk of money today, it would only make a very nice down payment on most homes and you'd still have to take out a mortgage. You certainly couldn't easily buy twenty or more rental properties with it like you could back then.
Ah, but you also got the box of gold. While that gold had the exact same purchasing power in 1914 as the face value of the cash, it's purchasing power today is much more than a hundred grand. Let's do some quick math. The average cost of an ounce of gold in 1914, according to this chart by the National Mining Association, was $18.99. A hundred thousand dollars would have bought $100,000÷$18.99 per ounce, or 5265.92 ounces of gold. Today's gold price, as I write this, is $1664.28 per ounce. The gold has the purchasing power of $1664.28 per ounce multiplied by 5265.92 ounces, or $8,763,981.04 in today's dollars. Do you see where that purchasing power has been stolen? That's $8,663,981 in purchasing power that's been lost. That means that a hundred dollars used to have the purchasing power of approximately $8,764. Ten dollars back then was like approximately $870 today.
Looking again at the National Mining Association chart mentioned above, one quickly notices how long gold held its value at around twenty dollars per ounce. The chart only goes back to 1833, but the gold constant goes back much further, at least to the 1400s, according to this source. During all these years, there was no central bank in the United States of America, but the state banks more or less competed against each other using the Constitutionally approved coining standards for precious metals. That's economic stability. While there were economically troubled times, those times were short lived as the freer markets established in this nation quickly adjusted to market fluctuations and the market manipulations of the European central banks.
One notices how the cost of gold shoots up in the early thirties and then once again in the early seventies. Those were very economically troubled times and personally I'd like to know how much gold was owned and bought by central banks and the families that own them at the time. It's getting very scary now how quickly the price of not only gold, but of all precious metals, has shot up. That is an indication of how many dollars are out there floating around. While the economy might be growing in terms of dollars, economic activity has certainly slowed. I've heard that some indicators are pointing toward recovery, and I certainly hope they're correct, but in my personal life I see no indication that the economy is going to get better any time soon.
So we find ourselves in the present circumstances. With all the protests going on, with all the "occupation" movements taking place, it is apparent that the common folk have come to realize that something is very wrong. Very few people, however, seem to understand the history of how we came to this point in time. They blame this politician or that politician, this political party or that political party, this policy or that policy, this philosophy or that philosophy. They don't seem to understand that, while all these things may have contributed to the problems in one way or another, all these things have been manipulated across time to benefit the moneyed elite. If one thing has remained nearly constant over the past hundred years, it's that the old money has stayed with the same shadowy group of families controlling the world's central banking cartel. One thing is certain, since the Fed's birth in 1913 the economy has grown, but it has been quite unstable with huge mood swings. All the economic growth seems to have gone into their coffers. They have had a government sponsored and endorsed monopoly on the creation of our currency for nearly a hundred years and they have managed to utterly fail on maintaining the stability in the markets and a high employment rate as they promised they would.
What Americans had before the creation of the Fed was ownership. What they had was pride that they had earned their belongings, self reliance as they made their way through life, and respect for others' private property. What they had was freedom and independence. That has been taken away from us. Such principles have been slowly eroded over the decades. Hard work, ingenuity and independence have been replaced by sloth and dependence on the system. The vast majority of us own nothing. We are too far in debt. Too many of us are one step away from losing everything. We no longer do for ourselves and our families anymore. We no longer take the risks and reap the rewards. We stifle ourselves from fear of breaking one of the millions of laws on the books. We beg permission from government agencies to allow us to start our own businesses, to do what we do best. We demand that things be given to us for nothing and have become dependent on the system to take care of us. That is what happens when a monetary system based on something of value is allowed to be shifted into a fiat, paper currency system based on credit.
Yes, there are viable solutions out there that can be used to turn this economic situation around. Yes, I even think that some solutions based on government force of law and regulation can be applied to help the situation. But I don't think this will help if we lose focus on the main causes of the problem. I don't think government solutions will work so long as the Federal Reserve and their corporate cronies have so much power within the federal government. If we allow for competition in the market place, if we stop allowing government to protect and bailout corporations and the international banking systems, we can start empowering the individual.
People have a tendency to protect their selves, their families and their friends. They have a tendency to hang onto power tenaciously once they achieve it. They have a tendency to reward their friends and punish their enemies if given a chance. They have a tendency to become corrupted by the power. As long as government decides who is too big to fail and who is not, the wealthiest of the moneyed elite will be able to pay to play and to bankrupt those who they don't want to play with. As long as a government sanctioned monopoly on currency exists, it will be the moneyed elite and their political cronies who will call the shots. The ultimate answer has nothing to do with increasing taxes or imposing more regulations, the ultimate answer is to empower individuals and let them decide who thrives and who fails in an open, transparent marketplace by voting with their dollars. When the common folk once again throw off the chains of socialist government, demand respect for their natural rights, and are able to keep all the money they earn and possess property without fear of government sanctioned confiscation, then they shall be truly free and we will once again prosper. Then we will know economic stability whether we have economic growth or not.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
History, to me, is more than just names and dates and a series of events that happened on a timeline. It is more than just a linear progression. It is not two dimensional to be looked at simply in terms of cause and effect. It is like a diamond, like a clear multi-faceted crystal that can be examined in a multitude of ways from nearly infinite perspectives. To get a more accurate view of history it is important to examine as many of these perspectives and facets as possible. By doing so we can gain insight into the inner workings of mankind's psychology, particularly at the different class levels as they existed then and as they exist now. It is also important to examine the things that didn't happen, the would've beens and could've beens that never were. In this way we exercise our imaginations to help us evaluate present and future decisions for our personal lives going forward.
For the purpose of brevity, I don't want to go too far back into the past. I would like to mention a couple of points, however. The first is that money has been around for a very, very long time. It originated out of a need to represent the labor needed to produce certain products for trade for a more efficient barter system. The second is that the manipulation of money has been around for nearly as long as money has. Since money was usually coined from precious metals, it wasn't long before people figured out how to shave coins and debase the metals for their own profit while making the money worth less for the common folk. Such practices were quickly recognized as fraudulent, a form of stealing, and laws were enacted to attempt to prevent people from engaging in such practices.
The third point I'd like to mention is that paper money originated long ago in the form of receipts for gold deposited in the safes of local goldsmiths. In this way, the goldsmiths soon became the world's first bankers of sorts. Some of them soon discovered that the receipts they gave out were, in fact, as good as gold. They noticed that only a certain percentage of their costumers at any one time would come back soon and claim their gold, so they began to give out a certain percentage more receipts than they had gold, a practice very much like what is known today as fractional reserve. This made them very wealthy. It didn't take long, however, for the people to recognize the fraudulent nature of this practice and demand an end to it. Theft is theft whether done through covert or overt means.
This brings us to fiat money. It seems that with wealth comes power and influence. At some point, the wealthy bankers were able to convince the royalty of Europe to team up with them, so to speak. It wasn't hard to see the advantage this would have for both those classes of society as they could siphon off the wealth of the working, productive class and move it to the parasitic ruling class without direct taxation which most people oppose. Many people believe that fiat money is synonymous with paper money, but this is not so. Fiat money merely means money by decree, or money that law says must be accepted as a token of exchange when conducting trade. If a government passed a law requiring maple leaves to be used as tokens of exchange when conducting trade, then maple leaves would become legal tender and one could gather up maple leaves as one sees fit and use them at local merchants to purchase goods and services. If a merchant refused to take the maple leaves, the consumer could report that merchant to the local authorities and the merchant could be arrested and thrown in jail. This would remain so as long as the populace believed their government to be legitimate.
Fast forward to 1913. It was near the end of this year, actually closer to 1914, that the Federal Reserve act was passed. It is interesting to note that this act was not passed until after the 16th amendment to the Constitution was ratified, which happened earlier in Feb. 1913. This was, in my opinion, the most significant event of the 20th century. It was the creation of a semi-private, quasi-governmental central bank in the United States of America. It came about despite the dismantling of central banks in this nation twice in its young history. It came about despite the debates that had been going on since the inception of the nation. It came about despite the pragmatic arguments against letting such an institution take hold in our nation. It came about despite Constitutional law that forbade such an enterprise. It came about and legalized practices that had already been recognized as fraudulent centuries before.
There also was much secrecy surrounding the creation of the Federal Reserve. It seems to me that the population at the time was much more aware of the dangers of central banking than it is today. In order to gain the public trust those who would most benefit from such a system, the same oligarchic families that are involved in it today, had to resort to a great deal of deception and unethical means. These men knew what they were doing and they knew it was unsavory, that's why they wanted to remain hidden and they wanted the public misinformed. They knew their eventual goal would be to create a fiat paper currency that would slowly but surely steal the purchasing power of the common folk. In the meantime, as their system moved the economy toward inevitable collapse, they and their descendents would acquire an incredible amount of the real wealth in the world.
My favorite illustration of how this works follows. Let's say you had a rich great grandfather who had an extra two hundred thousand dollars he didn't know what to do with back in 1914. This was a very hefty sum back then, and he figured it was much more than was necessary to keep a family going for many generations. At the outbreak of WWI, (which coincidentally started not long after the passing of the Federal Reserve Act) he becomes uncertain as to the fate of mankind and so he decides to bury it in the backyard. He divides the money in half and puts a hundred thousand in cash in one box and buys a hundred thousand in physical gold bullion which he buries in another box. Not long after he dies and the two boxes are forgotten as he takes their hiding place to the grave, not that it matters as his estate is quite large even without it.
Now, let's say that you inherit his estate. You spot a place that looks like it might make a good rose garden and lo and behold you dig up the two boxes as you get to work. The cash, taken at face value, has lost an extreme amount of buying power. Consider that one could buy a loaf of bread for a nickel or less in 1914, a Ford Model T would cost one $99 dollars and a very nice house would cost one three thousand dollars or less. I'm not sure but I would guess that mansions would run from ten to thirty thousand. Although a hundred grand is still a good chunk of money today, it would only make a very nice down payment on most homes and you'd still have to take out a mortgage. You certainly couldn't easily buy twenty or more rental properties with it like you could back then.
Ah, but you also got the box of gold. While that gold had the exact same purchasing power in 1914 as the face value of the cash, it's purchasing power today is much more than a hundred grand. Let's do some quick math. The average cost of an ounce of gold in 1914, according to this chart by the National Mining Association, was $18.99. A hundred thousand dollars would have bought $100,000÷$18.99 per ounce, or 5265.92 ounces of gold. Today's gold price, as I write this, is $1664.28 per ounce. The gold has the purchasing power of $1664.28 per ounce multiplied by 5265.92 ounces, or $8,763,981.04 in today's dollars. Do you see where that purchasing power has been stolen? That's $8,663,981 in purchasing power that's been lost. That means that a hundred dollars used to have the purchasing power of approximately $8,764. Ten dollars back then was like approximately $870 today.
Looking again at the National Mining Association chart mentioned above, one quickly notices how long gold held its value at around twenty dollars per ounce. The chart only goes back to 1833, but the gold constant goes back much further, at least to the 1400s, according to this source. During all these years, there was no central bank in the United States of America, but the state banks more or less competed against each other using the Constitutionally approved coining standards for precious metals. That's economic stability. While there were economically troubled times, those times were short lived as the freer markets established in this nation quickly adjusted to market fluctuations and the market manipulations of the European central banks.
One notices how the cost of gold shoots up in the early thirties and then once again in the early seventies. Those were very economically troubled times and personally I'd like to know how much gold was owned and bought by central banks and the families that own them at the time. It's getting very scary now how quickly the price of not only gold, but of all precious metals, has shot up. That is an indication of how many dollars are out there floating around. While the economy might be growing in terms of dollars, economic activity has certainly slowed. I've heard that some indicators are pointing toward recovery, and I certainly hope they're correct, but in my personal life I see no indication that the economy is going to get better any time soon.
So we find ourselves in the present circumstances. With all the protests going on, with all the "occupation" movements taking place, it is apparent that the common folk have come to realize that something is very wrong. Very few people, however, seem to understand the history of how we came to this point in time. They blame this politician or that politician, this political party or that political party, this policy or that policy, this philosophy or that philosophy. They don't seem to understand that, while all these things may have contributed to the problems in one way or another, all these things have been manipulated across time to benefit the moneyed elite. If one thing has remained nearly constant over the past hundred years, it's that the old money has stayed with the same shadowy group of families controlling the world's central banking cartel. One thing is certain, since the Fed's birth in 1913 the economy has grown, but it has been quite unstable with huge mood swings. All the economic growth seems to have gone into their coffers. They have had a government sponsored and endorsed monopoly on the creation of our currency for nearly a hundred years and they have managed to utterly fail on maintaining the stability in the markets and a high employment rate as they promised they would.
What Americans had before the creation of the Fed was ownership. What they had was pride that they had earned their belongings, self reliance as they made their way through life, and respect for others' private property. What they had was freedom and independence. That has been taken away from us. Such principles have been slowly eroded over the decades. Hard work, ingenuity and independence have been replaced by sloth and dependence on the system. The vast majority of us own nothing. We are too far in debt. Too many of us are one step away from losing everything. We no longer do for ourselves and our families anymore. We no longer take the risks and reap the rewards. We stifle ourselves from fear of breaking one of the millions of laws on the books. We beg permission from government agencies to allow us to start our own businesses, to do what we do best. We demand that things be given to us for nothing and have become dependent on the system to take care of us. That is what happens when a monetary system based on something of value is allowed to be shifted into a fiat, paper currency system based on credit.
Yes, there are viable solutions out there that can be used to turn this economic situation around. Yes, I even think that some solutions based on government force of law and regulation can be applied to help the situation. But I don't think this will help if we lose focus on the main causes of the problem. I don't think government solutions will work so long as the Federal Reserve and their corporate cronies have so much power within the federal government. If we allow for competition in the market place, if we stop allowing government to protect and bailout corporations and the international banking systems, we can start empowering the individual.
People have a tendency to protect their selves, their families and their friends. They have a tendency to hang onto power tenaciously once they achieve it. They have a tendency to reward their friends and punish their enemies if given a chance. They have a tendency to become corrupted by the power. As long as government decides who is too big to fail and who is not, the wealthiest of the moneyed elite will be able to pay to play and to bankrupt those who they don't want to play with. As long as a government sanctioned monopoly on currency exists, it will be the moneyed elite and their political cronies who will call the shots. The ultimate answer has nothing to do with increasing taxes or imposing more regulations, the ultimate answer is to empower individuals and let them decide who thrives and who fails in an open, transparent marketplace by voting with their dollars. When the common folk once again throw off the chains of socialist government, demand respect for their natural rights, and are able to keep all the money they earn and possess property without fear of government sanctioned confiscation, then they shall be truly free and we will once again prosper. Then we will know economic stability whether we have economic growth or not.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Occupy Wall Street Sieges New York City
I was very excited to hear about occupy Wall Street. This really seemed to me to be the kind of thing we needed. At least here we would see peaceful protestors making demands that should be made. At least here we would see the grassroots taking matters into their own hands. This sounded like the kind of movement that could make a difference. Somehow, however, I managed to remain uninformed on what was going on with it. It was more than just the blackout by the corporate mainstream media that caused this, it was my ignorance toward looking it up for myself. As I heard more and more about it, particularly the police brutality aspect, I decided to look into it on my own.
I must say, I am happy to see people finally getting involved. I'm glad to see them realize that voting one big government party to replace another big government party is not going to solve any problem. I'm glad to see the anger directed in what I would consider the right direction, toward the corporations and banks that shield the established power elite. I'm glad to see my advice being taken (albeit also the advice of several far more famous historical figures) and the protests remaining peaceful. I'm glad to see the violence of the state being exposed, but saddened to see the victims of that violence suffer.
What I've observed happening validates what I've been saying for quite sometime now, in a way. I've been making the claim that more and more of the common folk have been waking up. More and more people have been coming to the conclusion that something is very wrong with the system. I noticed this long, long ago, but only really started to worry and do something about it in the last six or seven years. It takes others a little longer to get active. It takes them awhile to jump in the pool, so to speak, and many people have to see others crowding the pool before they decide to test the waters. What started out as a small gathering of people camping in a private park in order to protest the power of Wall Street has blossomed into large marches and protests and a full blown movement.
Perhaps that's why the corporate mainstream media decided to ignore this situation at first. In my opinion, they are continuing to under report this event. This could be perhaps one of the biggest stories of the day, perhaps the opening salvo in an attempt to peacefully reign in the uncontrolled power of unprecedented wealth in the hands of a very few people, in the hands of those who control the printing of fiat money. Perhaps this is the first step toward empowering the common folk and the individual once again. The corporate media certainly wouldn't want to let the common folk know that such a movement was gaining steam in this nation. They wouldn't want the masses of sheeple sympathizing with those protesting.
Since these people look so normal, and are so diverse, the corporate media would find it hard to spin this event as it unfolds. Here is further evidence that the media is colluding with the power elite, as I have been saying for years. Yet even this seems to be changing as we get reports (like this one) that chastise the police. There have been many reports of police misbehavior during this protest, but it seems to me that one still has to look to the Internet for sources such as RT and the live feed from Global Revolution for the best information regarding these protests. While it seems the corporate mainstream media only reports on these events when they feel they have to in order to remain relevant, the alternative sources sniff out these important events to gain relevance and to expose the public to a more truthful perspective.
The diversity of people protesting is astounding. This shows the melting pot aspect of the American nation. This is not a protest like one would see in the 1960s when one group or another was demanding rights for a specific group of people. It is not a group of black people demanding equal rights under the law or a group of hippies demanding an end to the Vietnam War, it's a diverse group of individuals demanding justice and an end to the unjust privileges garnered by the corporate elite, particularly those privileges that are paid for by taxing the middle class. These people provide a cross section of the population here in the United States of America that the vast majority of people can relate to in one way or another.
The variety of people and political opinions taking part in the Occupy Wall Street movement is both a strength and a weakness. The whole thing is rather nebulous. It's rather difficult to pin down exactly what changes the protestors would like to see enacted. Like a cloud, it can be in the shape of a dragon one minute, the next it's looking like a kitten. It's difficult to know whether or not you wish to get involved or get behind something when you're not exactly sure what solutions are being offered.
At the same time it's hard not to agree with complaints against corporate greed, corporate power and influence, the bailouts, the undo influence of the international mega-banks in our government structure, and the unchecked, secretive powers of private central banks that are supposed to be responsible for our economic well being. There seems to be real discussions occurring now on the streets of New York and elsewhere, open and transparent discussions amongst the masses of humanity. This is a great example of the open marketplace of ideas which can be tried out if government just lifts the restrictions that ban these ideas from competing with established institutions that have utterly failed.
It's good to see people complaining, and it's good to see them trying to hold those at the top of the heap accountable for their fraudulent practices. Personally, I don't like government solutions as there always seems to be unforeseen consequences to making laws prohibiting certain voluntary human interactions. One size fits all solutions will not work and are inherently unfair.
I hope that this discussion leads to people coming to the same conclusions I've reached. I hope they can come to see the wisdom in limiting government powers. I hope they come to understand that government will overstep it's limits any chance it gets if we do not remain vigilant. I hope they come to understand that by allowing government and their corporate, Wall Street buddies to regulate their own affairs through fiat rather than through a free market they have taken power from a working class that could vote with its dollars and given power to the few who have managed to gain a monopoly or cartelized privilege. With understanding comes the realization that with power comes corruption and the only way to tame that corruption is to take power away.
It seems to me that what is happening is almost as spiritual as it is emotional. Mankind seems to be evolving. The economic hardships we have suffered from recently seem to be teaching us something. We have hopefully learned that we cannot depend on government. We have hopefully learned that collectivism is not fair. We have hopefully learned that socialism leads to economic ruin. I hope we will all soon be ready to accept freedom and individualism and to give free markets a chance to work.
We are hopefully starting to learn that there must be a better way than through the institutions that have failed us utterly. I'm thinking that we will soon learn that those at the top will remain there until we take matters into our own hands. Yet how can we do that and still remain peaceful? What would be the best way to hold these institutions accountable if they do nothing when so many march in protest? Look at all those people on the street and ask yourself what would happen if they decided to withhold their money from the institutions they so distain? What would happen if we all decided not to pay taxes? What would happen if you starved the beast of your wealth and support? What would happen if we all simply decided to ignore their dictates and simply live our lives as free people, each individual deciding for themselves what is best for them? I wonder.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
I must say, I am happy to see people finally getting involved. I'm glad to see them realize that voting one big government party to replace another big government party is not going to solve any problem. I'm glad to see the anger directed in what I would consider the right direction, toward the corporations and banks that shield the established power elite. I'm glad to see my advice being taken (albeit also the advice of several far more famous historical figures) and the protests remaining peaceful. I'm glad to see the violence of the state being exposed, but saddened to see the victims of that violence suffer.
What I've observed happening validates what I've been saying for quite sometime now, in a way. I've been making the claim that more and more of the common folk have been waking up. More and more people have been coming to the conclusion that something is very wrong with the system. I noticed this long, long ago, but only really started to worry and do something about it in the last six or seven years. It takes others a little longer to get active. It takes them awhile to jump in the pool, so to speak, and many people have to see others crowding the pool before they decide to test the waters. What started out as a small gathering of people camping in a private park in order to protest the power of Wall Street has blossomed into large marches and protests and a full blown movement.
Perhaps that's why the corporate mainstream media decided to ignore this situation at first. In my opinion, they are continuing to under report this event. This could be perhaps one of the biggest stories of the day, perhaps the opening salvo in an attempt to peacefully reign in the uncontrolled power of unprecedented wealth in the hands of a very few people, in the hands of those who control the printing of fiat money. Perhaps this is the first step toward empowering the common folk and the individual once again. The corporate media certainly wouldn't want to let the common folk know that such a movement was gaining steam in this nation. They wouldn't want the masses of sheeple sympathizing with those protesting.
Since these people look so normal, and are so diverse, the corporate media would find it hard to spin this event as it unfolds. Here is further evidence that the media is colluding with the power elite, as I have been saying for years. Yet even this seems to be changing as we get reports (like this one) that chastise the police. There have been many reports of police misbehavior during this protest, but it seems to me that one still has to look to the Internet for sources such as RT and the live feed from Global Revolution for the best information regarding these protests. While it seems the corporate mainstream media only reports on these events when they feel they have to in order to remain relevant, the alternative sources sniff out these important events to gain relevance and to expose the public to a more truthful perspective.
The diversity of people protesting is astounding. This shows the melting pot aspect of the American nation. This is not a protest like one would see in the 1960s when one group or another was demanding rights for a specific group of people. It is not a group of black people demanding equal rights under the law or a group of hippies demanding an end to the Vietnam War, it's a diverse group of individuals demanding justice and an end to the unjust privileges garnered by the corporate elite, particularly those privileges that are paid for by taxing the middle class. These people provide a cross section of the population here in the United States of America that the vast majority of people can relate to in one way or another.
The variety of people and political opinions taking part in the Occupy Wall Street movement is both a strength and a weakness. The whole thing is rather nebulous. It's rather difficult to pin down exactly what changes the protestors would like to see enacted. Like a cloud, it can be in the shape of a dragon one minute, the next it's looking like a kitten. It's difficult to know whether or not you wish to get involved or get behind something when you're not exactly sure what solutions are being offered.
At the same time it's hard not to agree with complaints against corporate greed, corporate power and influence, the bailouts, the undo influence of the international mega-banks in our government structure, and the unchecked, secretive powers of private central banks that are supposed to be responsible for our economic well being. There seems to be real discussions occurring now on the streets of New York and elsewhere, open and transparent discussions amongst the masses of humanity. This is a great example of the open marketplace of ideas which can be tried out if government just lifts the restrictions that ban these ideas from competing with established institutions that have utterly failed.
It's good to see people complaining, and it's good to see them trying to hold those at the top of the heap accountable for their fraudulent practices. Personally, I don't like government solutions as there always seems to be unforeseen consequences to making laws prohibiting certain voluntary human interactions. One size fits all solutions will not work and are inherently unfair.
I hope that this discussion leads to people coming to the same conclusions I've reached. I hope they can come to see the wisdom in limiting government powers. I hope they come to understand that government will overstep it's limits any chance it gets if we do not remain vigilant. I hope they come to understand that by allowing government and their corporate, Wall Street buddies to regulate their own affairs through fiat rather than through a free market they have taken power from a working class that could vote with its dollars and given power to the few who have managed to gain a monopoly or cartelized privilege. With understanding comes the realization that with power comes corruption and the only way to tame that corruption is to take power away.
It seems to me that what is happening is almost as spiritual as it is emotional. Mankind seems to be evolving. The economic hardships we have suffered from recently seem to be teaching us something. We have hopefully learned that we cannot depend on government. We have hopefully learned that collectivism is not fair. We have hopefully learned that socialism leads to economic ruin. I hope we will all soon be ready to accept freedom and individualism and to give free markets a chance to work.
We are hopefully starting to learn that there must be a better way than through the institutions that have failed us utterly. I'm thinking that we will soon learn that those at the top will remain there until we take matters into our own hands. Yet how can we do that and still remain peaceful? What would be the best way to hold these institutions accountable if they do nothing when so many march in protest? Look at all those people on the street and ask yourself what would happen if they decided to withhold their money from the institutions they so distain? What would happen if we all decided not to pay taxes? What would happen if you starved the beast of your wealth and support? What would happen if we all simply decided to ignore their dictates and simply live our lives as free people, each individual deciding for themselves what is best for them? I wonder.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)