Magazines

News Journal: Number 29, October 26, 2010: American People’s No Confidence Voting Wave Wipes Out Democrats–It’s The Economy Stupid!–Videos

Posted on October 26, 2010. Filed under: Communications, Ethics, Issues, Law, Magazines, News, Newspapers, Politics, Print Media, Radio, Regulations, Society, Television, Web | Tags: , , , |

Republican Governors 35

Republican Senators 51

Republican Representatives 255

 

The Republicans will pickup a net total of 77 seats in House of Representatives for a total of 255.

The Republicans will also pickup a net total of 10 seats in the Senate for a total of 51 seats.

The American people want to stop the massive Government spending, deficits and bailouts and rising National debt of the Obama Administration.

Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis

Issue number 1 is jobs and the economy with nearly thirty million Americans looking for a full-time job and continuing high rates of unemployment.

www.shadowstats.com

Issue number 2 is massive Federal Government spending, deficits, bailouts and a rising National debt.

The National Debt Road Trip

The Trillion $$$ Dollar U.S. Economic Deficit Caused By Our Government

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Issue number 3 is Obamacare– the American people want it repealed as soon as possible and no money bills or appropriations to fund Obamacare.

Fight Obamacare Texas

Issue number 4 is illegal immigration–the American people want it stopped by immigration law enforcement and a completed border fence that is heavily patrolled.

What Are True Costs And Benefits Of Illegal Immigration?

Stop Illegal Immigration

 

The American people expect the Republican Party to balance the Federal Budget by significantly reducing Government spending and permanently closing Federal Departments including Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, and Transportation.

The number of Federal employees should be cut from over 2,000,000 to less than 1,000,000.

3 Reasons Public Sector Employees are Killing the Economy

 

The American people expect the Republican Party to make the Bush tax cuts permanent for all taxpayers and pass the FairTax–it is time!

The FairTax: It’s Time

Should the Republican Party fail to balance the budget and cut the size and scope of the Federal Government by permanently shutting down the above departments, these Republicans will be wiped out by the 2012 wave of tea party patriots.

Background Articles and Videos

Editor in Chief Insights: Obama’s Job Approval Trajectory

 

President Obama Heads into Midterms at Lowest Approval Rating of Presidency

Two-thirds of Americans believe country going off on the wrong track

“…Currently, two-thirds of Americans (67%) have a negative opinion of the job President Obama is doing while just over one-third (37%) have a positive opinion. This continues the president’s downward trend and he is now at the lowest job approval rating of his presidency.

These are some of the results of The Harris Poll of 3,084 adults surveyed online between October 11 and 18, 2010 by Harris Interactive.

It’s perhaps not surprising that nine in ten Republicans (90%) and Conservatives (89%) give the job the president is doing negative ratings. What may be surprising is that one-third of Democrats (34%) and Liberals (33%) also give him negative ratings, as do seven in ten Independents (70%) and six in ten Moderates (60%).

Americans who give the president the highest positive ratings are those with a post-graduate education (48%), a college education (47%), and those living in the West (42%). On the other end of the spectrum, almost three-quarters of those with a high school education or less (72%) and two-thirds of Midwesterners (66%) and Southerners (66%) give the President negative marks on his overall job.

While the president is at a low point, there is a political body with ratings much lower than his. Just one in ten Americans (11%) give Congress positive ratings on the job they are doing while nine in ten (89%) give them negative marks. While Congress may be under Democratic control, even four in five Democrats (81%) give them negative ratings.

Part of this negativity may have to do with the way Americans believe the country as a whole is going. Just one-third of U.S. adults (34%) say the country is going in the right direction while two-thirds (66%) say it is going off on the wrong track. While not close to the low it was before the 2008 election (11% said things were going in the right direction), this is one of the lower points of this year. …”

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/Hi_assets/TopHitPageNews.html

Rasmussen Reports

Trust on Issues

Voters Trust Republicans More on Eight of 10 Key Issues

“…Voters now trust Democrats over Republicans in only two areas – government ethics and corruption by a 41% to 36% margin and education where Democrats have a slight 42% to 40% edge.

The economy continues to be the most important issue on voters’ minds this election, and 49% place their trust in Republicans to handle this issue. Thirty-nine percent (39%) trust Democrats more. These findings show little change from early June 2009.

On the issue of health care, which voters place second on the list of important issues, Republicans hold a modest 47% to 40% advantage. Democrats were trusted more on this issue until the debate over a proposed national health care bill began to heat up in early September of last year.

Most voters continue to favor repeal of the national health care law, but the number of voters who expect the law to increase the deficit has fallen to the lowest point since its passage by Congress in March.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

Two surveys of 1,000 Likely U.S. Voters each were conducted October 12-13 and October 14-15, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Government ethics and corruption rate number three in terms of overall importance, but voters have been narrowly divided for the past several months over which party to trust more on this issue. Democrats have held small leads since February.

As for education, both parties have held very modest leads on the issue at different times for months now.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of voters nationwide place their trust in the hands of Republicans when it comes to the issue of taxes. Thirty-nine percent (39%) would rather the Democrats handle this issue. The GOP has held a solid lead over Democrats on this issue since early July 2009.

But most voters believe that Democrats in Congress want to raise taxes and spending, while Republicans in Congress want to cut taxes and spending.

When it comes to immigration, 45% trust Republicans, while 33% trust the Democrats more. The gap between the two parties has widened since the beginning of January as the debate over the immigration law in Arizona intensified. At the beginning of the year, voters were essentially evenly divided on which party to trust.

Voters feel more strongly than ever that the federal government is encouraging illegal immigration and that states like Arizona have the answer to the problem, but the Obama administration is challenging the Arizona law in federal court.

Republicans continue to be trusted more on national security issues and the war on terror, with 49% of voters trusting the GOP versus 39% who trust the Democrats more. When it comes the war in Afghanistan, Republicans hold a six-point advantage, 42% to 36%.

Similarly, voters trust Republicans more than Democrats to handle the war in Iraq, 43% to 37%. …”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues

Historical Federal Workforce Tables

Executive Branch Civilian Employment Since 1940

(end-of-fiscal-year count, excluding Postal Service, in thousands)

Fiscal Year Total Executive Branch Department of Defense Civilian Agencies
Total Agriculture HHS, Education, Social Sec. 1 Homeland Security Interior Justice Transportation Treasury Veterans Other
1940 699 256 443 98 9 18 46 11 45 40 176
1941 1,081 556 525 91 10 20 50 15 52 43 244
1942 1,934 1,291 643 95 11 20 49 22 55 44 348
1943 2,935 2,200 735 109 11 21 43 23 69 53 406
1944 2,930 2,246 683 78 11 21 42 21 81 51 378
1945 3,370 2,635 736 82 11 20 45 19 84 65 409
1946 2,212 1,416 795 97 12 20 51 17 95 169 335
1947 1,637 859 777 88 12 20 53 17 82 217 288
1948 1,569 871 698 82 13 18 57 20 79 196 233
1949 1,573 880 694 87 12 19 59 19 77 195 226
1950 1,439 753 686 84 13 20 66 20 76 188 219
1951 1,974 1,235 738 81 16 21 65 25 79 183 269
1952 2,066 1,337 729 79 15 22 61 25 75 175 278
1953 2,026 1,332 694 78 35 22 59 23 71 178 226
1954 1,875 1,209 666 76 35 21 56 24 67 179 207
1955 1,860 1,187 673 86 40 21 54 24 65 178 206
1956 1,864 1,180 684 89 46 20 53 24 64 177 210
1957 1,869 1,161 708 96 53 20 55 24 65 174 222
1958 1,817 1,097 720 101 55 20 56 24 64 172 227
1959 1,805 1,078 727 97 59 20 55 23 63 171 238
1960 1,808 1,047 761 99 62 21 56 24 62 172 265
1961 1,825 1,042 782 103 70 20 59 25 67 175 265
1962 1,896 1,070 827 111 77 20 63 25 69 177 284
1963 1,911 1,050 861 116 81 21 73 25 73 173 300
1964 1,884 1,030 855 108 83 21 70 26 72 172 302
1965 1,901 1,034 867 113 87 21 71 27 74 167 307
1966 2,051 1,138 913 119 100 21 75 27 76 170 324
1967 2,251 1,303 949 122 106 24 77 27 52 79 173 289
1968 2,289 1,317 972 123 117 23 78 29 56 79 176 292
1969 2,301 1,342 960 125 113 21 75 30 58 79 175 283
1970 2,203 1,219 983 118 112 23 75 33 62 84 169 308
1971 2,144 1,154 989 120 115 25 72 38 66 86 180 288
1972 2,117 1,108 1,009 118 114 29 72 40 65 90 184 295
1973 2,083 1,053 1,030 113 128 29 74 43 66 90 198 289
1974 2,140 1,070 1,070 116 142 30 77 46 68 97 202 292
1975 2,149 1,042 1,107 121 147 31 80 47 69 101 213 297
1976 2,157 1,010 1,147 128 155 32 82 48 71 105 222 303
1977 2,182 1,009 1,173 132 159 32 87 48 70 107 224 313
1978 2,224 1,000 1,225 138 161 37 84 49 70 110 229 348
1979 2,161 960 1,201 128 161 40 78 48 67 102 226 352
1980 2,161 960 1,201 129 163 40 77 48 66 102 228 346
1981 2,143 984 1,159 129 162 38 76 47 54 100 232 321
1982 2,110 990 1,121 121 153 38 79 48 57 98 236 291
1983 2,157 1,026 1,131 124 152 39 80 50 57 104 239 286
1984 2,171 1,044 1,127 119 150 39 79 53 57 109 240 283
1985 2,252 1,107 1,145 122 147 40 80 55 56 110 247 286
1986 2,175 1,068 1,108 113 138 39 74 56 56 114 240 277
1987 2,232 1,090 1,142 117 132 44 74 60 57 125 250 284
1988 2,222 1,050 1,172 121 128 48 78 63 58 135 245 297
1989 2,238 1,075 1,162 122 127 49 78 66 60 126 246 289
1990 2,250 1,034 1,216 123 129 49 78 71 61 132 248 326
1991 2,243 1,013 1,230 126 135 50 82 77 64 139 256 302
1992 2,225 952 1,274 128 136 56 85 82 64 133 260 329
1993 2,157 891 1,266 124 135 56 85 82 63 127 268 326
1994 2,085 850 1,235 120 133 55 81 83 59 128 262 315
1995 2,012 802 1,210 113 132 56 76 87 58 128 264 297
1996 1,934 768 1,166 110 130 62 71 88 58 118 251 279
1997 1,872 723 1,149 107 131 64 71 93 59 112 243 270
1998 1,856 693 1,163 106 130 68 72 95 59 112 240 281
1999 1,820 666 1,155 105 130 69 73 97 58 113 219 290
2000 1,778 651 1,127 104 126 70 74 98 58 113 220 265
2001 1,792 647 1,145 109 129 73 76 99 59 117 226 258
2002 1,818 645 1,173 98 130 76 77 96 96 118 223 258
2003 1,867 636 1,231 100 131 153 72 102 58 132 226 257
2004 1,882 644 1,238 111 130 153 77 104 57 111 236 257
2005 1,872 649 1,224 108 131 147 76 105 56 108 235 258
2006 1,880 653 1,227 105 129 154 72 107 54 107 239 260
2007 1,888 651 1,237 103 129 159 72 107 54 104 254 254
2008 1,960 670 1,289 104 132 172 76 109 55 106 274 261
2009 2,094 737 1,357 104 139 180 75 113 57 109 297 283

http://www.opm.gov/feddata/HistoricalTables/ExecutiveBranchSince1940.asp

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Heritage Foundation 2010 Budget Charts–Federal Spending

Heritage Foundation 2010 Budget Charts–Federal Revenue

Heritage Foundation 2010 Budget Charts–Federal Debt and Deficits

Advertisements
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

News Journal: Number 28, October 16, 2010: The Obama Depression Deepens–Federal Reserve Executes–QE II Plan–“Operation Pawnshop”–$2,500 Billion In Quantitative Easing–Money Printing–Will It Be Enough?

Posted on October 16, 2010. Filed under: Communications, Globalization, International Trade, Issues, Law, Magazines, Mass Media, News, Newspapers, Politics, Print Media, Radio, Web | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

Non-conventional vs. Traditional Federal Reserve System Building

“Credit expansion is the governments foremost tool in their struggle against the market economy. In their hands it is the magic wand designed to conjure away the scarcity of capital goods, to lower the rate of interest or to abolish it altogether, to finance lavish government spending, to expropriate the capitalists, to contrive everlasting booms, and to make everybody prosperous.”

“The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.”

~Ludwig von Mises

Peter Schiff – It’s Scary How Clueless Bernanke Is

The Gold Dollar | Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

Fed’s Next Move: What Will Boost the Economy?

Helicopter Ben Bernanke 10/15/10 Part 1

Helicopter Ben Bernanke 10/15/10 Part 2

Swonk Says Bernanke Laid Out Rationale for Fed QE: Video

Currencies, Phillips curve, inflation target, Ramsey, SchiffRadio.com

Bernanke Says Fed Stimulus Move Coming, Amount Unknown

Tyson Says Quantitative Easing ‘Only Policy Option Left’

Jim Grant on Bloomberg 10/8/10: Quantitative Easing Is Just Money Printing

Mandelbrot (Chaos Theory) Taleb (Black Swan) on markets

End the Fed | Ron Paul

The primary goal of the Federal Reserve System is price stability or the avoidance of inflation for the U.S. economy.

However, unlike other central banks, the Federal Reserve also was given several other goals by Congress:

“The goals of monetary policy are spelled out in the Federal Reserve Act, which specifies that the Board of Governors and the Federal Open Market Committee should seek “to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.” …”

http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pdf/pf_2.pdf

Since the Fed already has a zero interest rate policy or ZIRP with the Federal Funds rate target range of between 0.0% – .25% and a low inflation rate for the time being under 2%, the Federal Reserve now turns it monetary policy tools on the persistent high unemployment rates, now at 9.6% and headed once again to 10% or more.

Series Id:           LNS14000000 Seasonally Adjusted Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status:  Unemployment rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.8 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.6 6.9 7.4
2009 7.7 8.2 8.6 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.8 10.1 10.0 10.0
2010 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.9 9.7 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.6

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet

The Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, communicated in an October 15, 2010 speech in Boston what the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) unconventional monetary policy was targeting– maximum employment–by printing more money and purchasing Treasuries and other bonds:

“…In short, there are clearly many challenges in communicating and conducting monetary policy in a low-inflation environment, including the uncertainties associated with the use of nonconventional policy tools. Despite these challenges, the Federal Reserve remains committed to pursuing policies that promote our dual objectives of maximum employment and price stability. In particular, the FOMC is prepared to provide additional accommodation if needed to support the economic recovery and to return inflation over time to levels consistent with our mandate. …”

Translation, the Fed will be printing more money starting in November to expand the money and credit supply by purchasing Treasury securities including bills, notes and bonds in the market as well other assets such as bonds with the objective of lowering the unemployment rate.

http://nowandfutures.com/key_stats.html

The Fed will be attempting to “inflate” the economy out of the current “jobless recovery” into another economic boom.

Call it quantitative easing, credit easing or “nonconventional” monetary policy, I call it overdosing on interventionism.

Quantitative Easing–Videos

What is the size, scope and duration of the “quantitative easing” or overdosing on interventionism ?

How big will the Fed’s weekly habit be?

My guess it will start “small” with $2 to $5 billion per week and gradually increase to about $15 billion per week?

How long will the Fed persist in this habit before going cold turkey?

At least twelve to forty-eight months or until the unemployment rate is below 6% and core inflation is over 2%.

This will require another massive expansion of the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet.

How much will it take?

My guess is a 1% reduction in the U-3 official unemployment rate would take a minimum of $600 billion per year ($200,000 money or credit expansion times 3,000,000 new jobs in one year)

A 4% reduction in the unemployment rate from 10% to 5% or the creation of about 12,000,000 new jobs would require a minimum of $2,500 billion dollars over four years.

The U.S. official unemployment rate as measured by U-3 is again headed towards 10% with over 15,000,000 Americans unemployed.

The private sector needs to create between 250,000 and 300,000 jobs per month to reduce the official unemployment rate by just .1%.

Currently the private sector is creating less than 100,000 jobs per month.

The United States needs between 100,000 to 150,000 jobs to absorb new entrants into the labor market due to the population growth. There are currently over 1.1 million unemployed new entrants that have not found their first job.

Another 150,000 to 200,000 jobs is are needed to reduce the unemployment by .1%.

Unfortunately, the persistent unemployment problem is even worse.

The U-6 total unemployment rate increased from 16.7% in August to 17.1% in October 2010.

With a total civilian labor force of about 155 million, a 17.1% unemployment rate means that over 26,500,000 Americans are looking for full-time jobs.

This represents over twice the number of unemployed Americans, about 13 million, during the worse month of the Great Depression, March 1933.

Assume it takes a minimum of $200,000 increase in the money and credit supply to create one new job.

Assume it takes 250,000 new jobs per month to reduce the unemployment rate by .1% or 3,000,000 jobs per year to reduce the unemployment rate by 1.2%.

Then the Federal Reserve would need to expand the money and credit supply by about $600 billion per year.

If the objective is to reduce the unemployment rate official unemployment rate U-3 from about 10% to 5% then the Federal Reserve would need to expand the money and credit supply by about $2,500 billion over a forty-eight month period.

I fully expect both the U-3 and U-6 unemployment rates to rise by at least .1 to .2% per month for next three to six months.

This would bring the official unemployment rate or U-3 over 10% during the first quarter of 2011 and the total unemployment rate or U-6 over 18% by the start of the second quarter of 2011.

This would represent over 15 million Americans unemployed and over 28 million seeking full-time unemployment.

This in turn will mean the U.S. economy is entering a “new” recession or a “double dip recession” with declining and most likely negative growth rates in the second and third quarter of 2011 and an increased probability of deflation or a declining general price level for goods and services.

Therefore the case for an expansionary monetary policy is still strong and increasing.

With the Federal Funds rate essentially zero, the Federal Reserve will be purchasing assets such as Treasury securities and agency mortgage-backed securities starting in November and continuing for a least six months until the U.S. unemployment rates are down by at least 1% to 2% or more and growth in production or the gross national product is at least above 3% to 4%.

Assuming the Federal Reserve purchases $12 billion in assets or securities each week, the total amount of the quantitative easing will be about $2,500 billion over the next forty-eight months to bring the official unemployment rate U-3 to about 5%.

The Federal Reserve cannot count upon the central bank of Communist China, the People’s Bank of China, to appreciate the Yuan by more than 5% to 10% per year relative to the U.S. dollar to encourage U.S. exports and reduce Chinese imports to the United States.

The real problem is Federal government spending that should be drastically cut until a balanced or even surplus budget is the result.

The Bush tax rate cuts in 2001 and 2003 need to be made permanent as well.

Until such fiscal economic policies are actually implemented, the only monetary policy “bullets” that the Federal Reserve has left is quantitative easing or money printing to purchase assets by expanding their balance sheet.

The Federal Government has for the last two years run deficits exceeding 1,000 billion each year and totaling over $2,500 billion not counting interest and this is likely to continue for at least one or two years until the U.S. economy fully recovers and the unemployment rates are well below 7%.

These budgetary deficits need to be financed by the Treasury Department issuing Treasury bills, notes and bonds.

The Federal Reserve will monetize some of these Treasury debts as part of its quantitative easing operations to the extent other buyers of Treasuries cannot be found.

What is the size or quantity of the quantitative easing?

I do not expect this to be announced, but at least $2,500 billion may be needed in the next forty-eight months to avoid another recession, significantly reduce unemployment to under 6%, and increase the growth of the economy above 4%.

Will such a “nonconventional” monetary policy work?

Only if the Congress and the President drastically cut the Federal Budget so it balances, do not increase taxes, and repeal Obama care.

In other words,this “nonconventional” monetary policy strategy of asset purchases or quantitative easing is not very likely to work any time soon.

The problem with government intervention into the economy is it always requires even more government intervention to correct past mistakes.

Both fiscal and monetary policy are generating massive uncertainty and a lack of confidence by consumers and businesses results in the deferral of consumption and investment expenditures and the hiring of new employees.

Bernanke understands this for he wrote in his Ph.D. dissertation at M.I.T.:

“…increase uncertainty provides an incentive to defer investments in order to wait for new information.”

Massive increases in the size and scope of the Federal government has resulted in huge budgetary deficits and proposed tax increase during a “jobless recovery”.

These deficits must be financed and the Federal Reserve will make sure that Treasury debt in the form of bills, notes and bonds will be purchased by printing more money as needed.

The Federal Reserve “nonconventional” monetary policy of printing more money is essentially government intervention into the economy to accommodate the U.S. Government’s Department of the Treasury need in financing massive government deficits

The Federal Open Market Committee will purchase Treasuries, mostly short-term Treasury bills but some notes and bonds in exchange for Federal Reserve Notes or money.

While the Fed’s cover story may be that this is needed to reduce unemployment, the real objective is financing massive Federal government spending and deficits. This is similar to what was done from 1942 to 1951 where Treasury long-term government bond yields were fixed at very low levels to finance World War II.

In fact, the Federal Reserve will be debasing the U.S. dollar by reducing the purchasing power of the dollar.

End the Fed | Ron Paul

This is a hidden tax paid by all the American people.

The cost of exports will rise as the U.S. dollar depreciates relative to other foreign currencies.

The price of petroleum will significantly rise and Americans will be paying over $3 a gallon in 2011 and over $4 a gallon in 2012.

The increases in petroleum and gasoline prices will in turn impact food prices.

The Federal Reserve uses a core personal consumption expenditure (PCE) price index approach in measuring and setting inflation targets, which excludes food and energy. The core personal consumption is a less volatile inflation or price measure than a change in total personal consumption expenditures which includes energy and food.

However, the American people need to eat and use gasoline to power their cars and heating oil to warm their homes.

The American people do not tolerate fools, even educated fools of the ruling class, for very long when they are losing their jobs, homes, health care and retirement plans and their children and grandchildren cannot find jobs or complete their college education.

The Second American Revolution has started.

On Tuesday November 2, 2010, election day, a shot will be heard around the world that even the world’s central bankers will be able to hear, if not fully comprehend.

During which the Federal Open Market Committee or FOMC will meet to decide when and how much quantitative easing or credit easing is needed to create jobs, avoid another recession and finance the U.S. government massive deficits.

The U.S. economy is in a liquidity trap where conventional monetary policy is ineffective and “nonconventional” monetary policy cannot work effectively until the appropriate fiscal policies are a reality and working.

The U.S. economy is slowly drowning in a flood of government intervention that has simply failed in generating jobs and high rates of economic growth and wealth creation.

The American people are paying the price for our ruling class’s continuing failures.

After quantitative easing or “operation pawn shop” fails and the value of the U.S. dollars is further debased, a period of inflation will follow and the Obama Depression will become an inflationary depression–a black swan.

“To be told that the Fed did what it could isn’t much comfort to a family who loses its house to foreclosure, a businessman forced into bankruptcy, a sixty-five-year-old whose retirement fund is devastated, a would-be borrower turned away by a beleaguered bank, a new college grad who can’t find a job, any job. For those victims and all the others, a final verdict on the Fed’s response to the Great Panic must await the health of the U.S. economy in 2010 and 2011 and beyond.”

~David Wessle, In Fed We Trust, Ben Bernanke’s War On the Great Panic, page 266.

“It is indeed one of the principal drawbacks of every kind of interventionism that it is so difficult to reverse the process.”

“Economics does not say that isolated government interference with the prices of only one commodity or a few commodities is unfair, bad, or unfeasible. It says that such interference produces results contrary to its purpose, that it makes conditions worse, not better, from the point of view of the government and those backing its interference.”

~Ludwig von Mises

Roubini: U.S. Running Out of Options to Stimulate Economy

Roubini On Double Dip

Nassim Nicholas Taleb – What is a “Black Swan?”

Background Articles and Videos

Peter Schiff “We Should Save ‘Person Of The Year’ For People Who Do Good!

Ron Paul: Allow The Free Market, Not The Fed, To Set Interest Rates

Maynard Keynes Inventor of Quantitative Easing

The Financial Crisis and the Death of Macroeconomics | Joseph T. Salerno

Government’s Response to the Crisis: A Fantastic Success, for Government | Robert Higgs

Why You’ve Never Heard of the Great Depression of 1920 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Keynesian Predictions vs. American History | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Our Wise Overlords Are Just Here to Serve Us | Thomas E. Woods. Jr.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb Angry

16. The Evolution and Perfection of Monetary Policy

Crisis and Capitalism

Understanding the Financial Crisis

The Psychology of the Financial Crisis

Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve

How to Abolish the Federal Reserve

Speech

Chairman Ben S. Bernanke

At the Revisiting Monetary Policy in a Low-Inflation Environment Conference, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Boston, Massachusetts

October 15, 2010

Monetary Policy Objectives and Tools in a Low-Inflation Environment”…

“…However, possible costs must be weighed against the potential benefits of nonconventional policies. One disadvantage of asset purchases relative to conventional monetary policy is that we have much less experience in judging the economic effects of this policy instrument, which makes it challenging to determine the appropriate quantity and pace of purchases and to communicate this policy response to the public. These factors have dictated that the FOMC proceed with some caution in deciding whether to engage in further purchases of longer-term securities.

Another concern associated with additional securities purchases is that substantial further expansion of the balance sheet could reduce public confidence in the Fed’s ability to execute a smooth exit from its accommodative policies at the appropriate time. Even if unjustified, such a reduction in confidence might lead to an undesired increase in inflation expectations, to a level above the Committee’s inflation objective. To address such concerns and to ensure that it can withdraw monetary accommodation smoothly at the appropriate time, the Federal Reserve has developed an array of new tools.7 With these tools in hand, I am confident that the FOMC will be able to tighten monetary conditions when warranted, even if the balance sheet remains considerably larger than normal at that time.

Central bank communication provides additional means of increasing the degree of policy accommodation when short-term nominal interest rates are near zero. For example, FOMC postmeeting statements have included forward policy guidance since December 2008, and the most recent statements have reflected the FOMC’s anticipation that exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate are likely to be warranted “for an extended period,” contingent on economic conditions. A step the Committee could consider, if conditions called for it, would be to modify the language of the statement in some way that indicates that the Committee expects to keep the target for the federal funds rate low for longer than markets expect. Such a change would presumably lower longer-term rates by an amount related to the revision in policy expectations. A potential drawback of using the FOMC’s statement in this way is that, at least without a more comprehensive framework in place, it may be difficult to convey the Committee’s policy intentions with sufficient precision and conditionality. The Committee will continue to actively review its communications strategy with the goal of providing as much clarity as possible about its outlook, policy objectives, and policy strategies.

Conclusion
In short, there are clearly many challenges in communicating and conducting monetary policy in a low-inflation environment, including the uncertainties associated with the use of nonconventional policy tools. Despite these challenges, the Federal Reserve remains committed to pursuing policies that promote our dual objectives of maximum employment and price stability. In particular, the FOMC is prepared to provide additional accommodation if needed to support the economic recovery and to return inflation over time to levels consistent with our mandate. Of course, in considering possible further actions, the FOMC will take account of the potential costs and risks of nonconventional policies, and, as always, the Committee’s actions are contingent on incoming information about the economic outlook and financial conditions. ..”

Bernanke sees case for more Federal Reserve easing

“… Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Friday offered his most explicit signal yet that the U.S. central bank was set to ease monetary policy further, but provided no details on how aggressively it might act.

Bernanke warned a prolonged period of high unemployment could choke off the U.S. recovery and that the low level of inflation presented an uncomfortable risk of deflation, a dangerous downward slide in prices.

“There would appear — all else being equal — to be a case for further action,” Bernanke said at a conference sponsored by the Boston Federal Reserve Bank.

With overnight interest rates already close to zero, many economists expect the Fed to launch a fresh round of bond purchases, perhaps on the order of $500 billion, to push borrowing costs lower at its next policy meeting on November 2-3.

Prices for longer-dated U.S. government debt fell after Bernanke’s remarks as investors bet the Fed would be successful in generating more inflation. Stocks were mixed while the dollar briefly hit an eight-month low against the euro.

Bernanke said the central bank could bolster its economy and inflation-lifting efforts by indicating a willingness to hold interest rates low for longer than currently expected.

The Fed pushed overnight rates to zero in December 2008 and then bought $1.7 trillion in U.S. government and mortgage-linked bonds to offer more support for the economy.

Officials have said further asset buying, or quantitative easing, would be the course they would most likely pursue to spur a stronger recovery.

Bernanke indicated Fed policymakers were still weighing how aggressive they should be, leaving markets to guess as to the details of any operation. …”

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Bernanke-says-sees-case-for-rb-4235164349.html?x=0&.v=3

Personal consumption expenditures price index

“…he PCE price index (PCEPI) (or PCE deflator, PCE price deflator, Implicit Price Deflator for Personal Consumption Expenditures (IPD for PCE) (by the BEA), Chain-type Price Index for Personal Consumption Expenditures (CTPIPCE) (by the FOMC )) is a United States-wide indicator of the average increase in prices for all domestic personal consumption. It is indexed to a base of 100 in 2005. Using a variety of data including U.S. Consumer Price Index and Producer Price Index prices, it is derived from the largest component of the Gross Domestic Product in the BEA’s National Income and Product Accounts, personal consumption expenditures.

The less volatile measure of the PCE price index is the core PCE price index which excludes the more volatile and seasonal food and energy prices.

In comparison to the headline United States Consumer Price Index, which uses one set of expenditure weights for several years, this index uses a Fisher Price Index, which uses expenditure data from both the current period and the preceding period. Also, the PCEPI uses a chained index which compares one quarter’s price to the last quarter’s instead of choosing a fixed base. This price index method assumes that the consumer has made allowances for changes in relative prices. That is to say, they have substituted from goods whose prices are rising to goods whose prices are stable or falling.

The PCE rises about one-third percent less than the CPI, a trend that dates back to 1992. This may be due to the failure of CPI to take into account substitution. Alternatively, an unpublished report on this difference by the BLS suggests that most of it is from different ways of calculating hospital expenses and airfares.[1] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_consumption_expenditures_price_index

Black Swan Theory

“…The Black Swan Theory or “Theory of Black Swan Events” was developed by Nassim Nicholas Taleb to explain: 1) the disproportionate role of high-impact, hard to predict, and rare events that are beyond the realm of normal expectations in history, science, finance and technology, 2) the non-computability of the probability of the consequential rare events using scientific methods (owing to their very nature of small probabilities) and 3) the psychological biases that make people individually and collectively blind to uncertainty and unaware of the massive role of the rare event in historical affairs. Unlike the earlier philosophical “black swan problem”, the “Black Swan Theory” (capitalized) refers only to unexpected events of large magnitude and consequence and their dominant role in history. Such events, considered extreme outliers, collectively play vastly larger roles than regular occurrences.

Black Swan Events were characterized by Nassim Nicholas Taleb in his 2007 book (revised and completed in 2010), The Black Swan. Taleb regards almost all major scientific discoveries, historical events, and artistic accomplishments as “black swans” — undirected and unpredicted. He gives the rise of the Internet, the personal computer, World War I, and the September 11 attacks as examples of Black Swan Events.

The term black swan was a Latin expression — its oldest known reference comes from the poet Juvenal’s characterization of something being “rara avis in terris nigroque simillima cygno” (6.165).[1] In English, this Latin phrase means “a rare bird in the lands, and very like a black swan.” When the phrase was coined, the black swan was presumed not to exist. The importance of the simile lies in its analogy to the fragility of any system of thought. A set of conclusions is potentially undone once any of its fundamental postulates is disproven. In this case, the observation of a single black swan would be the undoing of the phrase’s underlying logic, as well as any reasoning that followed from that underlying logic.

Juvenal’s phrase was a common expression in 16th century London as a statement of impossibility. The London expression derives from the Old World presumption that all swans must be white because all historical records of swans reported that they had white feathers.[2] In that context, a black swan was impossible or at least nonexistent. After a Dutch expedition led by explorer Willem de Vlamingh on the Swan River in 1697, discovered black swans in Western Australia[3], the term metamorphosed to connote that a perceived impossibility might later be disproven. Taleb notes that in the 19th century John Stuart Mill used the black swan logical fallacy as a new term to identify falsification.

Specifically, Taleb asserts[4] in the New York Times:

What we call here a Black Swan (and capitalize it) is an event with the following three attributes.

First, it is an outlier, as it lies outside the realm of regular expectations, because nothing in the past can convincingly point to its possibility. Second, it carries an extreme impact. Third, in spite of its outlier status, human nature makes us concoct explanations for its occurrence after the fact, making it explainable and predictable.

I stop and summarize the triplet: rarity, extreme impact, and retrospective (though not prospective) predictability. A small number of Black Swans explains almost everything in our world, from the success of ideas and religions, to the dynamics of historical events, to elements of our own personal lives.

Coping with black swan events

The main idea in Taleb’s book is not to attempt to predict Black Swan Events, but to build robustness against negative ones that occur and being able to exploit positive ones. Taleb contends that banks and trading firms are very vulnerable to hazardous Black Swan Events and are exposed to losses beyond that predicted by their defective models.

Taleb states that a Black Swan Event depends on the observer—using a simple example, what may be a Black Swan surprise for a turkey is not a Black Swan surprise for its butcher—hence the objective should be to “avoid being the turkey” by identifying areas of vulnerability in order to “turn the Black Swans white”.

Identifying a black swan event

Based on the author’s criteria:

  1. The event is a surprise (to the observer).
  2. The event has a major impact.
  3. After the fact, the event is rationalized by hindsight, as if it had been expected.

Taleb’s ten principles for a black swan robust world

Taleb enumerates ten principles for building systems that are robust to Black Swan Events:[10]

  1. What is fragile should break early while it is still small. Nothing should ever become Too Big to Fail.
  2. No socialisation of losses and privatisation of gains.
  3. People who were driving a school bus blindfolded (and crashed it) should never be given a new bus.
  4. Do not let someone making an “incentive” bonus manage a nuclear plant – or your financial risks.
  5. Counter-balance complexity with simplicity.
  6. Do not give children sticks of dynamite, even if they come with a warning.
  7. Only Ponzi schemes should depend on confidence. Governments should never need to “restore confidence”.
  8. Do not give an addict more drugs if he has withdrawal pains.
  9. Citizens should not depend on financial assets or fallible “expert” advice for their retirement.
  10. Make an omelette with the broken eggs.

In addition to these ten principles, Taleb also recommends employing both physical and functional redundancy in the design of systems. These two steps can be found in the principles of resilience architecting. (Reference: Jackson, S. Architecting Resilient Systems: John Wiley & Sons. Hoboken, NJ: 2010.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory

Federal Reserve System: Purposes and Functions

http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pdf/pf_complete.pdf

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Quantitative Easing–Videos

Cracking Communist Chinese Currency–Float The Yuan/RBN or Devalue Your Currency Via U.S. Dollar 10% Per Year For Next Five Years Or Face U.S. Import Ban–No Pressure–Your Choice–Videos

Chinese Communist State Company–China National Offshore Oil Corp.(CNOOC)–Invests In Texas Oil–Videos

Printing More Money (Quantitative Easing) and The Coming Currency War and Decline In The Purchasing Power of The U.S. Dollar–Robbing The American People–Videos

The Monetarization of The Debt and Quantitative Easing: The Federal Reserve is printing $1,000,000,000,000!–Run-Away Inflation Coming Soon!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

News Journal: Number 26, October 15, 2010: Printing More Money (Quantitative Easing) and The Coming Currency War and Decline In The Purchasing Power of The U.S. Dollar–Robbing The American People–Videos

Posted on October 15, 2010. Filed under: Audio, Books, Communications, Digital Communication, Issues, Law, Magazines, Mass Media, News, Newspapers, Politics, Print Media, Recordings, Society, Sound, Television | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

“True, governments can reduce the rate of interest in the short run. They can issue additional paper money. They can open the way to credit expansion by the banks. They can thus create an artificial boom and the appearance of prosperity. But such a boom is bound to collapse soon or late and to bring about a depression.”

“The gold standard alone makes the determination of moneys purchasing power independent of the ambitions and machinations of governments, of dictators, of political parties, and of pressure groups.”

~Ludwig von Mises

Jim Rogers Currency Wars

“IMF Meeting Stokes Fear of Currency War”

Grant Says Quantitative Easing Is Just Money Printing: Video

Global Currency War Brewing

Is The World On The Verge Of A Currency War?

Daniel Rosen: Currency War

IMF Meeting Stokes Fear of Currency War

Webster Tarpley: “There’s a currency war!”

Heller Says `Very Difficult’ for Fed to Boost Growth: Video

Feldstein Predicts Dollar to Weaken, Boosting Exports: Video

Japan cooperates with US on international currency issues – NHK 101010

US House committee approves China currency bill – NHK 100925

US criticizes China, Japan over currency interventions – NHK 100917

Clyde Prestowitz discusses valuation of Chinese currency

Mar 24 10 Hearing on China’s Exchange Rate Policy, C. Fred Bergsten Opening Statement

Mar 24 10 Hearing on China’s Exchange Rate Policy, Clyde Prestowitz Opening Statement

The Truth About The Economy: Total Collapse

Ron Paul in September 14, 2007

The Federal Reserve System is a banking cartel that benefits the large banks at the expense of the American people.

Cartel economists and so-called experts cannot replace the market by attempting to fix the price of money or the dollar.

Abolish the Federal Reserve System.

Abolish fiat paper currency.

Establish a new United States currency backed by gold.

Milton Friedman on Monetary Policy – 1/3

Milton Friedman on Monetary Policy – 2/3

Milton Friedman on Monetary Policy – 3/3

This is necessary to stop the financing of massive Federal Government deficits by the Federal Reserve that is purchasing U. S. Treasury bills and notes with Federal Reserve Notes by printing money or the monetarization of government debt.

Money printing or quantitative easing decreases the purchasing power of the money supply–debasing of the currency– robbing the American people.

Will the Federal Reserve System and fiat paper money be abolished?

Not any time soon.

The result will first be a longer and deeper recession lasting well into 2013.

In 2013 the Federal Reserve System will be 100 years old.

The Federal Reserves System will celebrate by achieving by then the devaluation of the dollar by 99%.

In other words one dollar in 1913 will be worth 1 cent in 2013.

If this is monetary stability, one wonders what inflation really is.

Time to do away the Federal Reserve System for incompetence.

I do not expect the unemployment rate to fall below 8% for U-3 until 2013 at the earliest.

As unemployment slowly declines in 2011 and 2012, there will be at first a gradual increase in the general price level that will accelerate in 2013.

This will be due the inability of the Federal Reserve to reverse quickly enough its very aggressive expansive monetary policy.

In 2011 and 2012 import prices will rise as the Federal Reserve attempts to devalue the dollar compared with other national currencies in an attempt to expand exports by making them cheaper.

The price of a gallon gasoline in the United States will first rise above $3 in 2011 and $4 in 2012 mainly due to the devaluation of the U.S. dollar.

As Communist China gradually lets the value of its currency rise in value relative to the U.S. dollar, exports from China will rise in price. This means higher prices for goods imported into the U.S. from China.

The decline in the value or purchasing power of the dollar in 2011 and 2012 combined with unemployment rates exceeding 8% will mean further losses for the Democratic Party in 2012 including the Presidency.

The American people are rightfully mad as hell at the ruling class and political elites in Washington D.C.

Power of the Market – How to Cure Inflation 1

 

 

Power of the Market – How to Cure Inflation 2

 

Power of the Market – How to Cure Inflation 3

 

Ron Paul on the Federal Reserve and Government Deficit Spending

The Gold Standard in Theory and Myth by Joseph Salerno

“The gold standard has one tremendous virtue: the quantity of the money supply, under the gold standard, is independent of the policies of governments and political parties. This is its advantage. It is a form of protection against spendthrift governments.”

“Inflationism, however, is not an isolated phenomenon. It is only one piece in the total framework of politico-economic and socio-philosophical ideas of our time. Just as the sound money policy of gold standard advocates went hand in hand with liberalism, free trade, capitalism and peace, so is inflationism part and parcel of imperialism, militarism, protectionism, statism and socialism.”

~Ludwig von Mises

9. Consolidated Statement of Condition of All Federal Reserve Banks

Millions of dollars
Assets, liabilities, and capital Eliminations from
consolidation
Wednesday
Oct 6, 2010
Change since
Wednesday
Sep 29, 2010
Wednesday
Oct 7, 2009
Assets  
Gold certificate account   11,037 0 0
Special drawing rights certificate account   5,200 0 0
Coin   2,114 + 3 + 124
Securities, repurchase agreements, term auction
credit, and other loans
  2,101,199 + 7,113 + 216,329
Securities held outright 1   2,051,716 + 7,403 + 456,429
U.S. Treasury securities   819,072 + 7,403 + 49,887
Bills 2   18,423 0 0
Notes and bonds, nominal 2   752,832 + 7,390 + 52,364
Notes and bonds, inflation-indexed 2   42,318 0 – 2,270
Inflation compensation 3   5,499 + 13 – 207
Federal agency debt securities 2   154,105 0 + 20,294
Mortgage-backed securities 4   1,078,539 0 + 386,248
Repurchase agreements 5   0 0 0
Term auction credit   0 0 – 178,379
Other loans   49,483 – 290 – 61,721
Net portfolio holdings of Commercial Paper
Funding Facility LLC 6
  0 0 – 41,059
Net portfolio holdings of Maiden Lane LLC 7   28,510 + 40 + 2,206
Net portfolio holdings of Maiden Lane II LLC 8   15,674 – 201 + 1,213
Net portfolio holdings of Maiden Lane III LLC 9   22,782 – 258 + 2,616
Net portfolio holdings of TALF LLC 10   601 0 + 601
Preferred interests in AIA Aurora LLC and ALICO
Holdings LLC 11
  26,057 + 324 + 26,057
Items in process of collection (84) 463 + 98 + 310
Bank premises   2,222 – 7 + 1
Central bank liquidity swaps 12   61 0 – 49,770
Other assets 13   95,313 + 2,248 + 11,389
 
Total assets (84) 2,311,231 + 9,358 + 170,016

Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding. Footnotes appear at the end of the table. 9. Consolidated Statement of Condition of All Federal Reserve Banks (continued)

Millions of dollars
Assets, liabilities, and capital Eliminations from
consolidation
Wednesday
Oct 6, 2010
Change since
Wednesday
Sep 29, 2010
Wednesday
Oct 7, 2009
Liabilities
Federal Reserve notes, net of F.R. Bank holdings 918,609 + 4,849 + 42,489
Reverse repurchase agreements 14 64,440 – 2,930 + 1,540
Deposits (0) 1,253,413 + 6,593 + 113,645
Term deposits held by depository institutions 2,119 0 + 2,119
Other deposits held by depository institutions 1,000,014 + 15,875 + 33,477
U.S. Treasury, general account 49,530 – 8,299 + 18,525
U.S. Treasury, supplementary financing account 199,962 + 1 + 70,006
Foreign official 1,345 – 1,066 – 540
Other (0) 444 + 84 – 9,940
Deferred availability cash items (84) 2,598 + 410 – 182
Other liabilities and accrued dividends 15 15,029 + 91 + 6,468
Total liabilities (84) 2,254,089 + 9,014 + 163,961
Capital accounts
Capital paid in 26,687 + 1 + 1,798
Surplus 25,881 + 6 + 4,500
Other capital accounts 4,575 + 338 – 242
Total capital 57,142 + 344 + 6,055

Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.

1. Includes securities lent to dealers under the overnight and term securities lending facilities; refer to table 1A.

2.Face value of the securities.

3. Compensation that adjusts for the effect of inflation on the original face value of inflation-indexed securities.

4. Guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae. Current face value of the securities, which is the remaining principal balance of the underlying mortgages.

5.Cash value of agreements, which are collateralized by U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities.

6. Includes the book value of the commercial paper, net of amortized costs and related fees, and other investments held by the Commercial Paper Funding Facility LLC.

7. Refer to table 4 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 10.

8. Refer to table 5 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 10.

9. Refer to table 6 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 10.

10. Refer to table 7 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 10.

11. Refer to table 8.

12. Dollar value of foreign currency held under these agreements valued at the exchange rate to be used when the foreign currency is returned to the foreign central bank. This exchange rate equals the market exchange rate used when the foreign currency was acquired from the foreign central bank.

13. Includes other assets denominated in foreign currencies, which are revalued daily at market exchange rates, accrued dividends on the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s (FRBNY) preferred interests in AIA Aurora LLC and ALICO Holdings LLC, and the fair value adjustment to credit extended by the FRBNY to eligible borrowers through the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility.

14. Cash value of agreements, which are collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities, federal agency debt securities, and mortgage-backed securities.

15. Includes the liabilities of Maiden Lane LLC, Maiden Lane II LLC, Maiden Lane III LLC, and TALF LLC to entities other than the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, including liabilities that have recourse only to the portfolio holdings of these LLCs. Refer to table 4 through table 7 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 10.

Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee September 21, 2010″…At the conclusion of the discussion, the Committee voted to authorize and direct the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, until it was instructed otherwise, to execute transactions in the System Account in accordance with the following domestic policy directive:

“The Federal Open Market Committee seeks monetary and financial conditions that will foster price stability and promote sustainable growth in output. To further its long-run objectives, the Committee seeks conditions in reserve markets consistent with federal funds trading in a range from 0 to 1/4 percent. The Committee directs the Desk to maintain the total face value of domestic securities held in the System Open Market Account at approximately $2 trillion by reinvesting principal payments from agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in longer-term Treasury securities. The System Open Market Account Manager and the Secretary will keep the Committee informed of ongoing developments regarding the System’s balance sheet that could affect the attainment over time of the Committee’s objectives of maximum employment and price stability.”

The vote encompassed approval of the statement below to be released at 2:15 p.m.:

“Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in August indicates that the pace of recovery in output and employment has slowed in recent months. Household spending is increasing gradually, but remains constrained by high unemployment, modest income growth, lower housing wealth, and tight credit. Business spending on equipment and software is rising, though less rapidly than earlier in the year, while investment in nonresidential structures continues to be weak. Employers remain reluctant to add to payrolls. Housing starts are at a depressed level. Bank lending has continued to contract, but at a reduced rate in recent months. The Committee anticipates a gradual return to higher levels of resource utilization in a context of price stability, although the pace of economic recovery is likely to be modest in the near term.Measures of underlying inflation are currently at levels somewhat below those the Committee judges most consistent, over the longer run, with its mandate to promote maximum employment and price stability. With substantial resource slack continuing to restrain cost pressures and longer-term inflation expectations stable, inflation is likely to remain subdued for some time before rising to levels the Committee considers consistent with its mandate.The Committee will maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and continues to anticipate that economic conditions, including low rates of resource utilization, subdued inflation trends, and stable inflation expectations, are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate for an extended period. The Committee also will maintain its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its securities holdings.The Committee will continue to monitor the economic outlook and financial developments and is prepared to provide additional accommodation if needed to support the economic recovery and to return inflation, over time, to levels consistent with its mandate.”

Voting for this action: Ben Bernanke, William C. Dudley, James Bullard, Elizabeth Duke, Sandra Pianalto, Eric Rosengren, Daniel K. Tarullo, and Kevin Warsh.Voting against this action: Thomas M. Hoenig.Mr. Hoenig dissented, emphasizing that the economy was entering the second year of moderate recovery and that, while the zero interest rate policy and “extended period” language were appropriate during the crisis and its immediate aftermath, they were no longer appropriate with the recovery under way. Mr. Hoenig also emphasized that, in his view, the current high levels of unemployment were not caused by high interest rates but by an extended period of exceptionally low rates earlier in the decade that contributed to the housing bubble and subsequent collapse and recession. He believed that holding rates artificially low would invite the development of new imbalances and undermine long-run growth. He would prefer removing the “extended period” language and thereafter moving the federal funds rate upward, consistent with his views at past meetings that it approach 1 percent, before pausing to determine what further policy actions were needed. Also, given current economic and financial conditions, Mr. Hoenig did not believe that continuing to reinvest principal payments from SOMA securities holdings was required to support the Committee’s policy objectives.It was agreed that the next meeting of the Committee would be held on Tuesday-Wednesday, November 2-3, 2010. The meeting adjourned at 1:10 p.m. on September 21, 2010. …”

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcminutes20100921.htm

Background Articles and Videos

Marc-Faber– FedsPrinting to Create Final Crisis 8-3-2010

Quantitative easing

Marc Faber Sees Fed Introducing `Massive’ Quantitative Easing

Ron Paul: If You Care About The Poor You Have To Look At Monetary Policy

The Gold Standard Before the Civil War | Murray N. Rothbard

Monetary Policy, Deflation, And Quantitative Easing

“…Aren’t the excess bank reserves inflationary?

Potentially yes, but currently no. Even though banks are earning a meager 25 basis points on their reserves, that is not sufficient incentive to keep large quantities of excess reserves uninvested or unloaned. As they were in the mid-1930s, massive excess reserves are the result of banker fear and uncertainty. The banking system has been saved, but it hasn’t been made whole yet. Bankers continue to worry about reserve levels and liquidity levels and capital levels. They are willing to lend, but only very conservatively to credit-worthy borrowers. Also, much of the slowdown in bank lending comes from low demand for loans by highly qualified borrowers.

The idea that the excess reserves held on banks’ balance sheets should be “mopped up” to prevent them being used in inflationary ways later is a very dangerous idea. They are there voluntarily because bankers feel they are needed. To remove them would cause further bank retrenchment, as it did in the 1930s when the Fed decided to “mop up” the excess reserves of that time.

As the economy and confidence improves, banks will begin using their excess reserves more aggressively. At that point, the Fed will have to be very careful not to stifle that desirable activity on the one hand or let it get out of hand and become inflationary on the other hand. Since they have lots of good, two-handed economists, I think they can pull it off. ..”

http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2010/07/30/monetary-policy-deflation-and-quantitative-easing/

The Founding of the Federal Reserve | Murray N. Rothbard

If you work to earn money you need to watch this

Quantitative Easing

“…The term quantitative easing (QE) describes a monetary policy used by central banks to increase the supply of money by increasing the excess reserves of the banking system. This policy is usually invoked when the normal methods to control the money supply have failed, i.e the bank interest rate, discount rate and/or interbank interest rate are either at, or close to, zero.

A central bank implements QE by first crediting its own account with money it creates ex nihilo (“out of nothing”).[1] It then purchases financial assets, including government bonds, agency debt, mortgage-backed securities and corporate bonds, from banks and other financial institutions in a process referred to as open market operations. The purchases, by way of account deposits, give banks the excess reserves required for them to create new money, and thus hopefully induce a stimulation of the economy, by the process of deposit multiplication from increased lending in the fractional reserve banking system.

Risks include the policy being more effective than intended, spurring hyperinflation, or the risk of not being effective enough, if banks opt simply to sit on the additional cash in order to increase their capital reserves in a climate of increasing defaults in their present loan portfolio.[1]

“Quantitative” refers to the fact that a specific quantity of money is being created; “easing” refers to reducing the pressure on banks.[2] However, another explanation is that the name comes from the Japanese-language expression for “stimulatory monetary policy”, which uses the term “easing”.[3] Quantitative easing is sometimes colloquially described as “printing money” although in reality the money is simply created by electronically adding a number to an account. Examples of economies where this policy has been used include Japan during the early 2000s, and the United States, the United Kingdom and the Eurozone during the global financial crisis of 2008–the present, since the programme is suitable for economies where the bank interest rate, discount rate and/or interbank interest rate are either at, or close to, zero.

Concept

Ordinarily, the central bank uses its control of interest rates, or sometimes reserve requirements, to indirectly influence the supply of money.[1] In some situations, such as very low inflation or deflation, setting a low interest rate is not enough to maintain the level of money supply desired by the central bank, and so quantitative easing is employed to further boost the amount of money in the financial system.[1] This is often considered a “last resort” to increase the money supply.[4][5] The first step is for the bank to create more money ex nihilo (“out of nothing”) by crediting its own account. It can then use these funds to buy investments like government bonds from financial firms such as banks, insurance companies and pension funds,[1] in a process known as “monetising the debt“.

For example, in introducing its QE programme, the Bank of England bought gilts from financial institutions, along with a smaller amount of relatively high-quality debt issued by private companies.[6] The banks, insurance companies and pension funds can then use the money they have received for lending or even to buy back more bonds from the bank. The central bank can also lend the new money to private banks or buy assets from banks in exchange for currency.[citation needed] These have the effect of depressing interest yields on government bonds and similar investments, making it cheaper for business to raise capital.[7] Another side effect is that investors will switch to other investments, such as shares, boosting their price and thus creating the illusion of increasing wealth in the economy.[6] QE can reduce interbank overnight interest rates, and thereby encourage banks to loan money to higher interest-paying and financially weaker bodies.

More specifically, the lending undertaken by commercial banks is subject to fractional-reserve banking: they are subject to a regulatory reserve requirement, which requires them to keep a percentage of deposits in “reserve”,[citation needed]: these can only be used to settle transactions between them and the central bank.[7] The remainder, called “excess reserves”, can (but does not have to be) be used as a basis for lending. When, under QE, a central bank buys from an institution, the institution’s bank account is credited directly and their bank gains reserves.[6] The increase in deposits from the quantitative easing process causes an excess in reserves and private banks can then, if they wish, create even more new money out of “thin air” by increasing debt (lending) through a process known as deposit multiplication and thus increase the country’s money supply. The reserve requirement limits the amount of new money. For example a 10% reserve requirement means that for every $10,000 created by quantitative easing the total new money created is potentially $100,000. The US Federal Reserve‘s now out-of-print booklet Modern Money Mechanics explains the process.

A state must be in control of its own currency and monetary policy if it is to unilaterally employ quantitative easing. Countries in the eurozone (for example) cannot unilaterally use this policy tool, but must rely on the European Central Bank to implement it.[citation needed] There may also be other policy considerations. For example, under Article 123 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union[7] and later the Maastricht Treaty, EU member states are not allowed to finance their public deficits (debts) by simply printing the money required to fill the hole, as happened, for example, in Weimar Germany and more recently in Zimbabwe.[1] Banks using QE, such as the Bank of England, have argued that they are increasing the supply of money not to fund government debt but to prevent deflation, and will choose the financial products they buy accordingly, for example, by buying government bonds not straight from the government, but in secondary markets.[1][7]

HistoryQuantitative easing was used unsuccessfully[8] by the Bank of Japan (BOJ) to fight domestic deflation in the early 2000s.[9] During the global financial crisis of 2008–the present, policies announced by the US Federal Reserve under Ben Bernanke to counter the effects of the crisis are a form of quantitative easing. Its balance sheet expanded dramatically by adding new assets and new liabilities without “sterilizing” these by corresponding subtractions. In the same period the United Kingdom used quantitative easing as an additional arm of its monetary policy in order to alleviate its financial crisis.[10][11][12]

The European Central Bank (ECB) has used 12-month long-term refinancing operations (a form of quantitative easing without referring to it as such) through a process of expanding the assets that banks can use as collateral that can be posted to the ECB in return for Euros. This process has led to bonds being “structured for the ECB”[13]. By comparison the other central banks were very restrictive in terms of the collateral they accept: the US Federal Reserve used to accept primarily treasuries (in the first half of 2009 it bought almost any relatively safe dollar-denominated securities); the Bank of England applied a large haircut.

In Japan’s case, the BOJ had been maintaining short-term interest rates at close to their minimum attainable zero values since 1999. With quantitative easing, it flooded commercial banks with excess liquidity to promote private lending, leaving them with large stocks of excess reserves, and therefore little risk of a liquidity shortage.[14] The BOJ accomplished this by buying more government bonds than would be required to set the interest rate to zero. It also bought asset-backed securities and equities, and extended the terms of its commercial paper purchasing operation.[15]

RisksQuantitative easing is seen as a risky strategy that could trigger higher inflation than desired or even hyperinflation if it is improperly used and too much money is created.

Quantitative easing runs the risk of going too far. An increase in money supply to a system has an inflationary effect by diluting the value of a unit of currency. People who have saved money will find it is devalued by inflation; this combined with the associated low interest rates will put people who rely on their savings in difficulty. If devaluation of a currency is seen externally to the country it can affect the international credit rating of the country which in turn can lower the likelihood of foreign investment. Like old-fashioned money printing, Zimbabwe suffered an extreme case of a process that has the same risks as quantitative easing, printing money, making its currency virtually worthless.[1]

…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing

Federal Open Market Committee

“…About the FOMCThe term “monetary policy” refers to the actions undertaken by a central bank, such as the Federal Reserve, to influence the availability and cost of money and credit to help promote national economic goals. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 gave the Federal Reserve responsibility for setting monetary policy.The Federal Reserve controls the three tools of monetary policy–open market operations, the discount rate, and reserve requirements. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is responsible for the discount rate and reserve requirements, and the Federal Open Market Committee is responsible for open market operations. Using the three tools, the Federal Reserve influences the demand for, and supply of, balances that depository institutions hold at Federal Reserve Banks and in this way alters the federal funds rate. The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which depository institutions lend balances at the Federal Reserve to other depository institutions overnight.Changes in the federal funds rate trigger a chain of events that affect other short-term interest rates, foreign exchange rates, long-term interest rates, the amount of money and credit, and, ultimately, a range of economic variables, including employment, output, and prices of goods and services.

Structure of the FOMC

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) consists of twelve members–the seven members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; and four of the remaining eleven Reserve Bank presidents, who serve one-year terms on a rotating basis. The rotating seats are filled from the following four groups of Banks, one Bank president from each group: Boston, Philadelphia, and Richmond; Cleveland and Chicago; Atlanta, St. Louis, and Dallas; and Minneapolis, Kansas City, and San Francisco. Nonvoting Reserve Bank presidents attend the meetings of the Committee, participate in the discussions, and contribute to the Committee’s assessment of the economy and policy options.The FOMC holds eight regularly scheduled meetings per year. At these meetings, the Committee reviews economic and financial conditions, determines the appropriate stance of monetary policy, and assesses the risks to its long-run goals of price stability and sustainable economic growth.For more detail on the FOMC and monetary policy, see section 2 of the brochure on the structure of the Federal Reserve System and chapter 2 of Purposes & Functions of the Federal Reserve System.

2010 Members of the FOMC

  • Members
    • Ben S. Bernanke, Board of Governors, Chairman
    • William C. Dudley, New York, Vice Chairman
    • James Bullard, St. Louis
    • Elizabeth A. Duke, Board of Governors
    • Thomas M. Hoenig, Kansas City
    • Sandra Pianalto, Cleveland
    • Sarah Bloom Raskin, Board of Governors
    • Eric S. Rosengren, Boston
    • Daniel K. Tarullo, Board of Governors
    • Kevin M. Warsh, Board of Governors
    • Janet L. Yellen, Board of Governors …”

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomc.htm

FEDERAL RESERVE statistical release
H.4.1
Factors Affecting Reserve Balances of Depository Institutions and
Condition Statement of Federal Reserve Banks

Why Chinese Currency Manipulation Is America’s Fault by: Ian Fletcher April 15, 2010

“…Unfortunately, the token appreciation that is probably now in store won’t help very much. For one thing, Beijing has played this game before. China first started diversifying its currency reserves away from the dollar (which weakens currency manipulation) in July 2005, and from then until July 2008 allowed the yuan to rise from 8.28 to the dollar to 6.83, where it has since been held nearly steady. But this appreciation, while showcased by China, was purely nominal; after adjusting for inflation, the change was far smaller: about two percent.

How does China manipulate its currency? Mainly by preventing its exporters from using the dollars they earn as they wish. Instead, they are required to swap them for domestic currency at China’s central bank, which then “sterilizes” them by spending them on U.S. Treasury securities (and increasingly other, higher-yielding, investments) rather than U.S. goods. As a result, the price of dollars is propped up — which means the price of yuan is pushed down — by a demand for dollars which doesn’t involve buying American exports.

The amounts involved are astronomical: as of 2008, China’s accumulated dollar-denominated holdings amounted to $1.7 trillion, an astonishing 40 percent of China’s GDP. The China Currency Coalition estimated in 2005 that the yuan was undervalued by 40 percent; past scholarly estimates have ranged from 10 to 75 percent.

Why is this America’s fault? Because China’s currency is manipulated relative to our own only because we permit it, as there is no law requiring us to sell China our bonds and other assets. We could, in fact, end this manipulation at will. All we would need to do is bar China’s purchases, or just tax them to death.

This would be neither an extreme nor an unprecedented move. It is roughly what the Swiss did in 1972, when economic troubles elsewhere in the world generated an excessive flow of money seeking refuge in Swiss franc-denominated assets. This drove up the value of the franc and threatened to make Swiss manufacturing internationally uncompetitive. To prevent this, the Swiss government imposed a number of measures to dampen foreign investment demand for francs, including a ban on the sale of franc-denominated bonds, securities, and real estate to foreigners. Problem solved. (It did not even damage Switzerland’s standing as an international financial center, a key worry at the time.) …”

“…So the real underlying problem is that America doesn’t generate enough savings on its own to meet its voracious appetite for borrowing. China’s savings rate, thanks to deliberate suppression by the Chinese government of its people’s opportunities to spend what they earn, is an astonishing 50 percent. Ours was negative four percent in the last Federal Reserve report on the subject. We are—Oh, how Mao would have loved this!—decadent. …”

http://seekingalpha.com/article/198825-why-chinese-currency-manipulation-is-americas-fault


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

News Journal: Number 20, September 24, 2010: Eddie Fisher Dies At 82–Videos

Posted on September 24, 2010. Filed under: Audio, Books, Books, Magazines, Mass Media, Movies, Music, Newspapers, Print Media, Radio, Recordings, Society, Television, Web | Tags: , , , |

By the time I was thirty-three years old I`d been married to America`s sweetheart and America`s femme fatale and both marriages had ended in scandal; I`d been one of the most popular singers in America and had given up my career for love; I had fathered two children and adopted two children and rarely saw any of them; I was addicted to methamphetamines and I couldn`t sleep at night without a huge dose of Librium. And from all this I had learned one very important lesson: There were no rules for me. I could get away with anything so long as that sound came out of my throat.

Pop Singer Eddie Fisher Dies at Age 82

50s pop singer Eddie Fisher dies at age 82

“…Pop singer Eddie Fisher, whose clear voice brought him a devoted following of teenage girls in the early 1950s before marriage scandals overshadowed his fame, has died at age 82.
He passed away Wednesday night at his home in Berkeley of complications from hip surgery, his daughter, Tricia Leigh Fisher of Los Angeles, told The Associated Press.

“Late last evening the world lost a true America icon,” Fisher’s family said in a statement released by publicist British Reece. “One of the greatest voices of the century passed away. He was an extraordinary talent and a true mensch.”

The death was first reported by Hollywood website deadline.com.

In the early 50s, Fisher sold millions of records with 32 hit songs including “Thinking of You,” “Any Time,” “Oh, My Pa-pa,” “I’m Yours,” “Wish You Were Here,” “Lady of Spain” and “Count Your Blessings.”

His fame was enhanced by his 1955 marriage to movie darling Debbie Reynolds — they were touted as “America’s favorite couple” — and the birth of two children.

Their daughter Carrie Fisher became a film star herself in the first three “Star Wars” films as Princess Leia, and later as a best-selling author of “Postcards From the Edge” and other books.

Carrie Fisher spent most of 2008 on the road with her autobiographical show “Wishful Drinking.” In an interview with The Associated Press, she told of singing with her father on stage in San Jose. Eddie Fisher was by then in a wheelchair and living in San Francisco.

When Eddie Fisher’s best friend, producer Mike Todd, was killed in a 1958 plane crash, Fisher comforted the widow, Elizabeth Taylor. Amid sensationalist headlines, Fisher divorced Reynolds and married Taylor in 1959.

The Fisher-Taylor marriage lasted only five years. She fell in love with co-star Richard Burton during the Rome filming of “Cleopatra,” divorced Fisher and married Burton in one of the great entertainment world scandals of the 20th century.

Fisher’s career never recovered from the notoriety. He married actress Connie Stevens, and they had two daughters. Another divorce followed. He married twice more.

Edwin Jack Fisher was born Aug. 10, 1928, in Philadelphia, one of seven children of a Jewish grocer. At 15 he was singing on Philadelphia radio. …”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkHtqhe7byA

Eddie Fisher – I’ll Hold You In My Heart – 1951

EDDIE FISHER – “Wish You Were Here” (1952) – 45 RPM

“I’m Walking Behind You” Eddie Fisher

Eddie Fisher – Everything i have is yours

Eddie Fisher – Lady Of Spain

EDDIE FISHER – UNCHAINED MELODY

1950s Pop Music: Eddie Fisher singing “Tell Me Why” on his TV show (Aired live, 1953)

Eddie Fisher – Count Your Blessings – 1954

Eddie Fisher – Cindy Oh Cindy ( 1956 )

Eddie Fisher Turn Back The Hands Of Time

I Need You Now – Eddie Fisher

Eddie Fisher –Remember

Eddie Fisher – Oh My Papa [1954]

Eddie Fisher – Any Time

Eddie Fisher – On The Street Where You Live – 1956

 

 

 

 

 

 

I remember Eddie Fisher as the singer who married Debbie Reynolds,  then married Elizabeth Taylor, who three years latter left him for Richard Burton.

Only very vaguely do I remember him as a singer.

Today, I learned of his death at age 82 in Berkeley, California.

I was curious as to how good a singer he was.

After listening to the above I concluded he was a great singer.

May he rest in peace.

Background Articles and Videls

“…Edwin Jack “Eddie” Fisher (August 10, 1928 – September 22, 2010) was an American singer and entertainer, who was one of the world’s most famous and successful singers in the 1950s, selling millions of records and having his own TV show. He was married to Debbie Reynolds, Elizabeth Taylor, and Connie Stevens. His divorce from his first wife, Debbie Reynolds, to marry his best friend’s widow, Elizabeth Taylor, garnered scandalously unwelcome publicity at the time. …”

Eddie Fisher, famed 50’s pop singer, father of Carrie Fisher, dies at 82

“…Eddie Fisher, who had a pretty good talent for making hit records and an amazing talent for marrying beautiful women, died Wednesday at the age of 82.

While he began his career as a singer, he eventually became better known as the star in two of Hollywood’s great love triangles – newspaper and magazine coverage of which helped set the stage for today’s media celebrity saturation..

According to an announcement from his family yesterday, Fisher died at his Berkeley, Calif., home from complications of hip surgery.

Fisher originally made his musical mark as one of the last post-World War II “matinee idols,” handsome young singers like Frank Sinatra or Dean Martin whose manner suggested a bit of attitude.

Like many of his peers, his hit-record career didn’t survive music’s transition to rock ‘n’ roll in the mid-‘50s, though he continued as a popular stage act and television host for another three decades.

…”
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/2010/09/23/2010-09-23_eddie_fisher_famed_50s_pop_singer_father_of_carrie_fisher_dies_at_85.html#ixzz10TXJVRyz

Eddie Fisher Biography

“…Eddie Fisher (born August 10, 1928) is an American singer and entertainer. He was born Edwin John Fisher in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the fourth of seven children born to Joseph Fisher and Kate Winokur, who were Russian-Jewish immigrants. His father’s surname was originally Fisch, but was anglicised to Fisher upon entry to the United States.

To his family, Fisher was always called “Sonny Boy” or “Sonny,” which may have been an allusion to a song made famous by Al Jolson. It was known at an early age that he had talent as a vocalist and he started singing in numerous amateur contests, which he usually won. He sang on the radio in high school and was later on Arthur Godfrey’s Talent Scouts, a popular contest that was broadcast over the radio before moving to television. By 1946, Fisher was crooning with the bands of Buddy Morrow and Charlie Ventura. He was heard in 1949 by Eddie Cantor at Grossinger’s Resort in the Borscht Belt. After performing on Cantor’s radio show he was an instant hit and gained nationwide exposure. He was then signed to a contract with RCA Victor.

Fisher was drafted into the U.S. Army in 1951 and sent to Texas for basic training. He served a year in Korea. The photos of him in uniform during his time in the Service did not hurt his civilian career; after his discharge he became even more popular singing in top nightclubs. He also had a variety television series, Coke Time with Eddie Fisher (NBC) (1953)-(1957), appeared on Perry Como’s show, The Chesterfield Supper Club, the George Gobel Show, and had another series, The Eddie Fisher Show (NBC) (1957)-(1959).

A pre-Rock and Roll vocalist, Fisher’s strong and melodious tenor made him a teen idol and one of the most popular singers of the 1950s. He had seventeen songs in the Top 10 on the music charts between 1950 and 1956 and thirty-five in the Top 40. …”

http://www.basicfamouspeople.com/index.php?aid=3275

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Abba–Videos

The Animals–Videos

Joan Baez–Videos

The Beach Boys–Videos

The Beatles–Videos

Bee Gees–Videos

The Byrds–Videos

Mariah Carey–Videos

Johnny Cash–Videos

Ray Charles–Videos

Joe Cocker–Videos

Nat King Cole–Videos

Judy Collins–Videos

Perry Como–Videos

Sam Cooke–Videos

Sandy Denny–Videos

John Denver–Videos

Celine Dion–Videos

The Doors–Videos

Bob Dylan–Videos

Eagles–Video

Marianne Faithfull–Videos

Roberta Flack–Videos

Aretha Franklin–Videos

Marvin Gaye-Videos

Michael Jackson and Jackson Five–Videos

Elton John–Videos

Janis Joplan–Videos

The Kinks–Videos

Led Zeppelin–Videos

Little Richard–Videos

The Lovin’ Spoonful–Videos

The Mamas and Papas–Videos

Barry Manilow–Videos

Johnny Mathis–Videos

Don McLean–Videos

Bette Midler–Videos

Joni Mitchell–Videos

Olivia Newton-John–Videos

Roy Orbison–Videos

The Platters–Videos

Elvis Presley–Videos

Queen–Videos

Otis Redding–Videos

Lionel Richie–Videos

The Righteous Brothers–Videos

The Rolling Stones–Videos

Linda Ronstadt–Videos

Neil Sedaka–Videos

Diana Ross and The Supremes–Videos

Carly Simon–Videos

Simon & Garfunkel–Videos

Frank Sinatra–Videos

Dusty Springfield–Videos

Bruce Springsteen–Videos

Rod Stewart–Videos

Barbra Streisand–Videos

Songs

Singers and Songs: Musical Artists–Videos

Donna Summer–Videos

Switchfoot–Videos

James Taylor–Videos

Tina Turner–Videos

Shania Twain–Videos

Village People–Videos

Hayley Westenra–Videos

Steve Winwood–Videos

Stevie Wonder–Videos

Tammy Wynette–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

News Journal: Number 11, September 17, 2010:In Your Heart You Know Christine O’Donnell Is Right and Karl Rove Is Wrong

Posted on September 17, 2010. Filed under: Communications, Issues, Law, Magazines, Mass Media, News, Newspapers, Politics, Print Media, Radio, Society, Television, Web | Tags: , , , |

Freedom is the Only Solution

Rove Tells A Disagreeing Hannity: We Can’t Win With O’Donnell

Conservative Christine O’Donnell Makes Her Case Against RINO Mike Castle at RIght Online

Christine O’Donnell on socialismin America

Christine O’Donnell on Your World with Cavuto – September 2, 2010

Rush Limbaugh on Christine O’Donnell

Mark Levin interviews Christine O’Donnell for US Senate in Delaware

I am first and foremost a movement conservative of the traditional libertarian wing.

I would describe my political philosophy as classical liberal or what in America is called libertarian.

I vote for the candidate that comes closest to my own political philosophy and ignore party labels.

Today I consider myself an independent.

I have simply given up on the Republican Party for they have not limited the size and scope of government and have repeatedly engaged in government intervention both domestically and abroad.

The Democratic Party is a collectivist/statist party that favors heavy government intervention into the lives of the American people.

The Republican Party is also a collective/statist party that favors significant government intervention into the lives of the American people and the citizens of other countries as well–nation building.

Neither party will permanently close ten Federal Department that need to be shut down.

Neither party will support a FairTax, a national consumption tax to replace Federal income, payroll, gift and estate taxes.

Neither party will vigorously support immigration law enforcement and telling illegal aliens to please go home or you and your family will be deported.

Neither party will make both Social Security and Medicare, an individually controlled and owned account and insurance.

Neither party will pay down the National Debt and reduce unfunded liabilities.

Why? Both parties are populated with professional politicians more interested in holding office than in doing what is right and what the people are demanding.

The Republican Party at the local, state, and national level is deeply penetrated with progressives.

More and more Americans consider both political parties as damaged goods or brands.

Karl Rove is part of the problem. The reason many conservatives left the Republican Party were President Bush’s refusal to limit government spending by vetoing bills, comprehensive immigration reform and amnesty for illegal aliens, and his slowness in changing strategy and military commanders in the “war on terrorism” in Iraq.

The Republicans deserved to lose in both 2006 and 2008.

Keeping running progressive Republicans and the Republican Party will be the third-party.

The Democratic Party under the leadership of Barack Obama is quickly becoming a third-party.

Let the Democratic Party and Republican parties destroy themselvesjust as they wrecked the American economy.

A plaque on both parties for abandoning their principles for power.

Yes, Obama is five times worse but neither Bush nor Obama will ever get my vote nor will any candidate that is a progressive or socialist.

Let the people of Delaware decides whether they want a person running as a conservative or a progressive Republican.

If they want another Biden let them have one.

Rove better stop talking and start listening.

Defeat progressive liberals of both parties.

In your heart you know she is right!

Background Articles and Videos

Goldwater 1964 Presidential TV Spot featuring Raymond Massey

Barry Goldwater on economic planning

Barry Goldwater Speech

Extremism In The Defense Of Liberty Is No Vice

Reagan – A Time For Choosing

 

 

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

News Journal: Number 10, August 10, 2010: Pushing On A G-String–No Job Recovery And Declining Prices Results In Federal Reserve Buying Govenment Debt To Spur Economic Growth By Expanding Money Supply–Videos

Posted on August 10, 2010. Filed under: Issues, Magazines, News, Newspapers, Politics, Radio, Television, Web | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

“…Pushing on a string is a metaphor for influence that is more effective in moving things in one direction than another – you can pull, but not push.      

If something is connected to you by a string, you can move it toward you by pulling on the string, but you can’t move it away from you by pushing on the string. It is often used in the context of economic policy, specifically the view that “Monetary policy [is] asymmetric; it being easier to stop an expansion than to end a severe contraction.”[1]
…”      

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pushing_on_a_string      

G-string humor

      

      

http://www.shadowstats.com/      

      

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts      

      

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/money-supply-charts      

      

      

      

http://nowandfutures.com/key_stats.html

    

   

   http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/10/news/economy/fed_decision/index.htm   

 

Fed To Buy More Government Debt; Rates Remain Low

Federal Reserve to buy long-term Treasury debt, keeps target rate unchanged

      

Bob McTeer – FOMC Meeting

Bob McTeer – Deflation

Quantitative Easing Only Tool Left for Fed

Paulsen Says Tech, Consumer Stocks May Be Poised to Rise: Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vdnZ5GNMnY  

    

Fed Looks to Spur Growth by Buying Government Debt

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-10/fed-to-reinvest-principal-on-mortgage-proceeds-into-long-term-treasuries.html  

    

O’Sullivan Sees Pressure on Fed to Signal Policy Easing: Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ4hMc8QTY8     

 

Reinhart Sees New Round of Quantitative Easing by Fed: Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECF9B3zQIv8   

   

David Rovelli Discusses Investment Strategy, Fed Policy: Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFTXR7WHa0Y  

    

Jim Rogers on The Federal Reserve

The Federal Reserve recognizes that a jobless recovery is not a recovery at all and the Bush Obama Depression is only continuing and getting worse.   

The Federal Reserve statement is misleading when it comes to the state of the economy and future prospects:   

Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in June indicates that the pace of recovery in output and employment has slowed in recent months. Household spending is increasing gradually, but remains constrained by high unemployment, modest income growth, lower housing wealth, and tight credit. Business spending on equipment and software is rising; however, investment in nonresidential structures continues to be weak and employers remain reluctant to add to payrolls. Housing starts remain at a depressed level. Bank lending has continued to contract. Nonetheless, the Committee anticipates a gradual return to higher levels of resource utilization in a context of price stability, although the pace of economic recovery is likely to be more modest in the near term than had been anticipated.   

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20100810a.htm   

Fully expect unemployment rates measured by U-3, the official unemployment rate, to exceed 9% and by U-6, the real unemployment rate, to exceed 15% for the next two to three years.  

 This means that between 14 and 24 million Americans will be unemployed over the next two years. 

During the worst months of the Great Depression in 1933, the number of unemployed Americans was about 13 million. 

This would indeed be a very modest recovery in the near term.   

Actually it means the Bush Obama Depression will last well into 2014.   

Yes there will be positive economic growth in terms of output or production.   

No there will not be a recovery in terms of jobs for the “near term”–two or three years!

Disregard all the nonsense about a double dip recession, we are in a depression with over 20% of the American work force looking for full time work. 

The Federal Reserve bears much of the responsibility for creating this mess or financial crisis by having an expansionary or easy money policy to promote the profits of the commercial banks during the real estate “boom” or “bubble.” 

Bernanke: Why are we still listening to this guy?

 

Peter Schiff on Ben Bernanke Confirmation

The Federal Reserve will leave the Federal Funds rate at a target rate of between 0% to .25% for the foreseeable future.   

The Committee will maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and continues to anticipate that economic conditions, including low rates of resource utilization, subdued inflation trends, and stable inflation expectations, are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period.   

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20100810a.htm   

 This statement only confirms that the Federal Reserve fully expects the Bush Obama Depression to last another two years or more.   

The Federal Reserve will gradually expand the money supply by engaging in open market operations by buying Government Treasury Notes with Federal Reserve Notes on the interest earned from its existing portfolio of assets.    

To help support the economic recovery in a context of price stability, the Committee will keep constant the Federal Reserve’s holdings of securities at their current level by reinvesting principal payments from agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in longer-term Treasury securities.1 The Committee will continue to roll over the Federal Reserve’s holdings of Treasury securities as they mature.   

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20100810a.htm   

Over the last two years the Federal Reserve purchased over $1 trillion in debt securities backed by mortgages and government-sponsored mortgages from such firms as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.   

Debt and Deficits

 

On Tuesday the Federal Reserve announced it would reinvest principle payments from these maturing securities into long-term Treasurys by purchasing 2-year and 10-year Treasury Notes. The amount purchased over the next year will amount to about $100 billion in additional purchasers of Treasurys.

Unfortunately, this expansionary monetary policy is not going to work.     

The Fed is pushing on a string, the G-string of Giant Government.     

The real problem is the uncertainty being generated by the Obama Administration in the form of government intervention into the U.S. economy including mandated health care plans, financial regulation, energy regulation, and  proposed new taxes on energy and higher tax rates by letting the Bush tax rate cuts expire at the end of 2010.   

Both small and medium size businesses see that the Obama Administration  is expanding the size and scope of government.     

The only conclusion is this can only lead to more and higher taxes that will largely come from small and medium size businesses that create the jobs and wealth.   

As a result most small and medium size businesses are simply not hiring and many are still laying-off employees as business declines.     

What will it take for an expansionary monetary policy to work.     

Fundamental changes in fiscal policy on both the spending and tax revenue side.     

A major reduction in Federal expenditures would require the shutting down of ten Federal Departments.     

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)

      

President Obama simply will not cut spending by closing down entire Federal Departments.    

President Obama wants to do the exact opposite by expanding or increasing the budgets of most Federal Departments.  

Obama lacks both a constrained vision and courage to even attempt such a fiscal policy.     

The only thing left then is tax reform.This would require the replacement of all existing income and payroll taxes with a broad based national consumption sales tax such as the FairTax.        

The FairTax: It’s Time

Again President Obama simply does not have the courage to take on the base of the progressive radical socialist Democratic Party.      

Instead President Obama wants to add new taxes, either a cap-and-trade energy tax and/or a value added tax on top of all existing taxes.     

These taxes if passed would only make the Bush Obama Depression last well into 2014.     

This is much like what President Franklin D. Roosevelt did in the 1930s by increasing income tax rates and expanding consumption taxes on certain goods and service.     

As a result the U.S. economy did not recover from the Great Depression until 1946.    

Robert Higgs on Economic Prospects for 2010 

    

To summarize, the Obama Administration’s fiscal policies will only make the recession last much longer.     

Thus Obama’s fiscal policy dooms to failure the Federal Reserve’s expansionary monetary policy.     

Until the current political regime is changed, expect no recovery and little confidence by businesses and consumers.     

More taxes and more government spending is not a plan, it is an economic catastrophe.     

The result will be an inflationary depression–The Bush Obama Depression!   

Time to end the banking cartel of the Federal Reserve System whose only function is protect banking profits and pass along banking losses to the American people.  

Gary North, an economist, knows and understands that the Federal Reserve System is a banking cartel and really does love to push the string while over 30 million Americans look for a full time job:

“…The FED knows it is pushing on a string. It loves that string. Why? Because that limp string – no commercial bank lending – delays the advent of price inflation. This has enabled the FED to achieve the following by doubling the monetary base (the FED’s balance sheet):

1. Bail out the big banks (asset swaps)
2. Keep the banking system from imploding
3. Bail out the Federal government
4. Bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
5. Keep real estate from collapsing
6. Slow price inflation to close to zero
7. Keep T-bill rates under 0.5%

At what cost? Unemployed workers. That is a small price to pay if you are a high-salary central banker with a fully funded pension.

The FED’s policies have not failed. They have succeeded beyond Bernanke’s wildest expectations. Greenspan’s bubbles are all popped. Price inflation is gone. There is no price deflation, either. For the first time since 1955, the FED has attained its mandate from Congress: price stability. …”

End The Fed Now!

The Cash Drop

     

Background Articles and Videos

Pushing on a String

by Gary North

“…The FED knows it is pushing on a string. It loves that string. Why? Because that limp string – no commercial bank lending – delays the advent of price inflation. This has enabled the FED to achieve the following by doubling the monetary base (the FED’s balance sheet):

1. Bail out the big banks (asset swaps)
2. Keep the banking system from imploding
3. Bail out the Federal government
4. Bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
5. Keep real estate from collapsing
6. Slow price inflation to close to zero
7. Keep T-bill rates under 0.5%

At what cost? Unemployed workers. That is a small price to pay if you are a high-salary central banker with a fully funded pension.

The FED’s policies have not failed. They have succeeded beyond Bernanke’s wildest expectations. Greenspan’s bubbles are all popped. Price inflation is gone. There is no price deflation, either. For the first time since 1955, the FED has attained its mandate from Congress: price stability.

Greenspan’s FED never attained the power over the economy that Bernanke’s FED now possesses. The FED has been given almost complete regulatory control over the financial system. Congress buckled. Bernanke has been given a free ride. The Federal government now owns General Motors. Keynesianism is having its greatest revival in 30 years.

So far, the FED has won. Yet deflationists argue that the economy is in a deflationary spiral that the FED cannot prevent. They do not know what they are talking about. They never have.

CONCLUSION

The Federal Reserve can re-ignite monetary inflation at any time by charging banks a fee to keep excess reserves with the FED.

Anyone who predicts an inevitable price deflation does not understand that the present scenario is the product of legitimately terrified bankers and the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors. At any time, the FED can get all of the banks’ money lent. But the FED knows that this will double the money supply within weeks. This will create mass price inflation.

This is the central fact in the inflation vs. deflation debate. Until the deflationists answer it with a unified voice, they will remain, as their predecessors remained, people with neither a theoretical nor a practical case for their position.

So, the FED waits. Meanwhile, the Federal government’s share of the economy rises relentlessly because of the deficits. This is not going to change in the next few years.

We are seeing Keynesianism’s last stand. When it fails, the FED will force the banks to lend. Then we will see mass inflation.

Mass deflation? Forget about it. …”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north722.html

Federal Reserve System Crisis 

  

End The Fed! – Why the Federal Reserve Must Be Abolished!

Fiat Empire – Why the Federal Reserve Violates the US Constitution 1 of 6

Fiat Empire – Why the Federal Reserve Violates the US Constitution 2 of 6

Fiat Empire – Why the Federal Reserve Violates the US Constitution 3 of 6

Fiat Empire – Why the Federal Reserve Violates the US Constitution 4 of 6

Fiat Empire – Why the Federal Reserve Violates the US Constitution 5 of 6

Fiat Empire – Why the Federal Reserve Violates the US Constitution 6 of 6

“…Release Date: August 10, 2010   

For immediate release

Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in June indicates that the pace of recovery in output and employment has slowed in recent months. Household spending is increasing gradually, but remains constrained by high unemployment, modest income growth, lower housing wealth, and tight credit. Business spending on equipment and software is rising; however, investment in nonresidential structures continues to be weak and employers remain reluctant to add to payrolls. Housing starts remain at a depressed level. Bank lending has continued to contract. Nonetheless, the Committee anticipates a gradual return to higher levels of resource utilization in a context of price stability, although the pace of economic recovery is likely to be more modest in the near term than had been anticipated.   

Measures of underlying inflation have trended lower in recent quarters and, with substantial resource slack continuing to restrain cost pressures and longer-term inflation expectations stable, inflation is likely to be subdued for some time.   

The Committee will maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and continues to anticipate that economic conditions, including low rates of resource utilization, subdued inflation trends, and stable inflation expectations, are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period.   

To help support the economic recovery in a context of price stability, the Committee will keep constant the Federal Reserve’s holdings of securities at their current level by reinvesting principal payments from agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in longer-term Treasury securities.1 The Committee will continue to roll over the Federal Reserve’s holdings of Treasury securities as they mature.   

The Committee will continue to monitor the economic outlook and financial developments and will employ its policy tools as necessary to promote economic recovery and price stability.   

Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; James Bullard; Elizabeth A. Duke; Donald L. Kohn; Sandra Pianalto; Eric S. Rosengren; Daniel K. Tarullo; and Kevin M. Warsh.   

Voting against the policy was Thomas M. Hoenig, who judges that the economy is recovering modestly, as projected. Accordingly, he believed that continuing to express the expectation of exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period was no longer warranted and limits the Committee’s ability to adjust policy when needed. In addition, given economic and financial conditions, Mr. Hoenig did not believe that keeping constant the size of the Federal Reserve’s holdings of longer-term securities at their current level was required to support a return to the Committee’s policy objectives. …”   

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20100810a.htm

 

Quantitative easing

E5. Introduction to Monetary Policy

Quantitative Easing  

     

“…The term quantitative easing (QE) describes a form of monetary policy used by central banks to increase the supply of money in an economy when the bank interest rate, discount rate and/or interbank interest rate are either at, or close to, zero.[citation needed] A central bank does this by first crediting its own account with money it has created ex nihilo (“out of nothing”).[1] It then purchases financial assets, including government bonds and corporate bonds, from banks and other financial institutions in a process referred to as open market operations. The purchases, by way of account deposits, give banks the excess reserves required for them to create new money by the process of deposit multiplication from increased lending in the fractional reserve banking system. The increase in the money supply thus stimulates the economy. Risks include the policy being more effective than intended, spurring hyperinflation, or the risk of not being effective enough, if banks opt simply to pocket the additional cash in order to increase their capital reserves in a climate of increasing defaults in their present loan portfolio.[1]     

“Quantitative” refers to the fact that a specific quantity of money is being created; “easing” refers to reducing the pressure on banks.[2] However, another explanation is that the name comes from the Japanese-language expression for “stimulatory monetary policy”, which uses the term “easing”.[3] Quantitative easing is sometimes colloquially described as “printing money” although in reality the money is simply created by electronically adding a number to an account. Examples of economies where this policy has been used include Japan during the early 2000s, and the United States and United Kingdom during the global financial crisis of 2008–2009. …”     

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing     

  Open Market Operations

“…Open market operations–purchases and sales of U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities–are the Federal Reserve’s principal tool for implementing monetary policy. The short-term objective for open market operations is specified by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). This objective can be a desired quantity of reserves or a desired price (the federal funds rate). The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which depository institutions lend balances at the Federal Reserve to other depository institutions overnight.      

The Federal Reserve’s objective for open market operations has varied over the years. During the 1980s, the focus gradually shifted toward attaining a specified level of the federal funds rate, a process that was largely complete by the end of the decade. Beginning in 1994, the FOMC began announcing changes in its policy stance, and in 1995 it began to explicitly state its target level for the federal funds rate. Since February 2000, the statement issued by the FOMC shortly after each of its meetings usually has included the Committee’s assessment of the risks to the attainment of its long-run goals of price stability and sustainable economic growth. …”      

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/openmarket.htm      

The Discount Rate

     

“…The discount rate is the interest rate charged to commercial banks and other depository institutions on loans they receive from their regional Federal Reserve Bank’s lending facility–the discount window. The Federal Reserve Banks offer three discount window programs to depository institutions: primary credit, secondary credit, and seasonal credit, each with its own interest rate. All discount window loans are fully secured.      

Under the primary credit program, loans are extended for a very short-term (usually overnight) to depository institutions in generally sound financial condition. Depository institutions that are not eligible for primary credit may apply for secondary credit to meet short-term liquidity needs or to resolve severe financial difficulties. Seasonal credit is extended to relatively small depository institutions that have recurring intra-year fluctuations in funding needs, such as banks in agricultural or seasonal resort communities.      

The discount rate charged for primary credit (the primary credit rate) is set above the usual level of short-term market interest rates. (Because primary credit is the Federal Reserve’s main discount window program, the Federal Reserve at times uses the term “discount rate” to mean the primary credit rate.) The discount rate on secondary credit is above the rate on primary credit. The discount rate for seasonal credit is an average of selected market rates. Discount rates are established by each Reserve Bank’s board of directors, subject to the review and determination of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The discount rates for the three lending programs are the same across all Reserve Banks except on days around a change in the rate. …”      

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/discountrate.htm      

Federal Funds Rate

“…In the United States, the federal funds rate is the interest rate at which private depository institutions (mostly banks) lend balances (federal funds) at the Federal Reserve to other depository institutions, usually overnight.[1] It is the interest rate banks charge each other for loans.[2]      

The interest rate that the borrowing bank pays to the lending bank to borrow the funds is negotiated between the two banks, and the weighted average of this rate across all such transactions is the federal funds effective rate.      

The federal funds target rate is determined by a meeting of the members of the Federal Open Market Committee which normally occurs eight times a year about seven weeks apart. The committee may also hold additional meetings and implement target rate changes outside of its normal schedule.      

The Federal Reserve uses Open market operations to influence the supply of money in the U.S. economy[3] to make the federal funds effective rate follow the federal funds target rate. The target value is known as the neutral federal funds rate[4]. At this rate, growth rate of real GDP is stable in relation to Long Run Aggregate Supply at the expected inflation rate.      

U.S. banks and thrift institutions are obligated by law to maintain certain levels of reserves, either as reserves with the Fed or as vault cash. The level of these reserves is determined by the outstanding assets and liabilities of each depository institution, as well as by the Fed itself, but is typically 10%[5] of the total value of the bank’s demand accounts (depending on bank size). In the range of $9.3 million to $43.9 million, for transaction deposits (checking accounts, NOWs, and other deposits that can be used to make payments) the reserve requirement in 2007-2008 was 3 percent of the end-of-the-day daily average amount held over a two-week period. Transaction deposits over $43.9 million held at the same depository institution carried a 10 percent reserve requirement.      

For example, assume a particular U.S. depository institution, in the normal course of business, issues a loan. This dispenses money and decreases the ratio of bank reserves to money loaned. If its reserve ratio drops below the legally required minimum, it must add to its reserves to remain compliant with Federal Reserve regulations. The bank can borrow the requisite funds from another bank that has a surplus in its account with the Fed. The interest rate that the borrowing bank pays to the lending bank to borrow the funds is negotiated between the two banks, and the weighted average of this rate across all such transactions is the federal funds effective rate.      

The nominal rate is a target set by the governors of the Federal Reserve, which they enforce primarily by open market operations. That nominal rate is almost always what is meant by the media referring to the Federal Reserve “changing interest rates.” The actual Fed funds rate generally lies within a range of that target rate, as the Federal Reserve cannot set an exact value through open market operations.      

Another way banks can borrow funds to keep up their required reserves is by taking a loan from the Federal Reserve itself at the discount window. These loans are subject to audit by the Fed, and the discount rate is usually higher than the federal funds rate. Confusion between these two kinds of loans often leads to confusion between the federal funds rate and the discount rate. Another difference is that while the Fed cannot set an exact federal funds rate, it can set a specific discount rate.      

The federal funds rate target is decided by the governors at Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meetings. The FOMC members will either increase, decrease, or leave the rate unchanged depending on the meeting’s agenda and the economic conditions of the U.S. It is possible to infer the market expectations of the FOMC decisions at future meetings from the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) Fed Funds futures contracts, and these probabilities are widely reported in the financial media. …”      

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_funds_rate      

Money Supply

“…In economics, the money supply or money stock, is the total amount of money available in an economy at a particular point in time.[1] There are several ways to define “money,” but standard measures usually include currency in circulation and demand deposits (depositors’ easily-accessed assets on the books of financial institutions).[2][3]      

Money supply data are recorded and published, usually by the government or the central bank of the country. Public and private sector analysts have long monitored changes in money supply because of its possible effects on the price level, inflation and the business cycle.[4]      

That relation between money and prices is historically associated with the quantity theory of money. There is strong empirical evidence of a direct relation between long-term price inflation and money-supply growth, at least for rapid increases in the amount of money in the economy. That is, a country such as Zimbabwe which saw rapid increases in its money supply also saw rapid increases in prices (hyperinflation). This is one reason for the reliance on monetary policy as a means of controlling inflation in the U.S.[5][6] This causal chain is contentious, however: some heterodox economists argue that the money supply is endogenous (determined by the workings of the economy, not by the central bank) and that the sources of inflation must be found in the distributional structure of the economy.[7] In addition to some economists’ seeing the central bank’s control over the money supply as feeble, many would also say that there are two weak links between the growth of the money supply and the inflation rate: first, an increase in the money supply can cause a sustained increase in real production instead of inflation in the aftermath of a recession, when many resources are underutilized. Second, if the velocity of money, i.e., the ratio between nominal GDP and money supply changes, an increase in the money supply could have either no effect, an exaggerated effect, or an unpredictable effect on the growth of nominal GDP. …”      

“…Money is used as a medium of exchange, in final settlement of a debt, and as a ready store of value. Its different functions are associated with different empirical measures of the money supply. There is no single “correct” measure of the money supply: instead, there are several measures, classified along a spectrum or continuum between narrow and broad monetary aggregates. Narrow measures include only the most liquid assets, the ones most easily used to spend (currency, checkable deposits). Broader measures add less liquid types of assets (certificates of deposit, etc.)      

This continuum corresponds to the way that different types of money are more or less controlled by monetary policy. Narrow measures include those more directly affected and controlled by monetary policy, whereas broader measures are less closely related to monetary-policy actions.[6] It is a matter of perennial debate as to whether narrower or broader versions of the money supply have a more predictable link to nominal GDP.      

The different types of money are typically classified as “M”s. The “M”s usually range from M0 (narrowest) to M3 (broadest) but which “M”s are actually used depends on the country’s central bank. The typical layout for each of the “M”s is as follows:      

Type of money M0 MB M1 M2 M3 MZM
Notes and coins (currency) in circulation (outside Federal Reserve Banks, and the vaults of depository institutions) V[8] V V V V V
Notes and coins (currency) in bank vaults V[8] V
Federal Reserve Bank credit (minimum reserves and excess reserves) V
traveler’s checks of non-bank issuers V V V V
demand deposits V V V V
other checkable deposits (OCDs), which consist primarily of negotiable order of withdrawal (NOW) accounts at depository institutions and credit union share draft accounts. V[9] V V V
savings deposits V V V
time deposits less than $100,000 and money-market deposit accounts for individuals V V
large time deposits, institutional money market funds, short-term repurchase and other larger liquid assets[10] V
all money market funds V      

M0: In some countries, such as the United Kingdom, M0 includes bank reserves, so M0 is referred to as the monetary base, or narrow money.[11]
MB: is referred to as the monetary base or total currency.[8] This is the base from which other forms of money (like checking deposits, listed below) are created and is traditionally the most liquid measure of the money supply.[12]
M1: Bank reserves are not included in M1.
M2: represents money and “close substitutes” for money.[13] M2 is a broader classification of money than M1. Economists use M2 when looking to quantify the amount of money in circulation and trying to explain different economic monetary conditions. M2 is a key economic indicator used to forecast inflation.[14]
M3: Since 2006, M3 is no longer published or revealed to the public by the US central bank.[15] However, there are still estimates produced by various private institutions.
MZM: Money with zero maturity. It measures the supply of financial assets redeemable at par on demand.
The ratio of a pair of these measures, most often M2/M0, is called an (actual, empirical) money multiplier. …”      

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply      

“Ben Bernanke Has Never Gotten Anything Right,” Peter Schiff Says: Fed Officials Respond

The Dollar Bubble

Peter Schiff Calls Fed Reserve Chief Ben Bernanke A Liar

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

News Journal: Number 09, August 9, 2010: President Obama’s Big Arrogant Despicable (BAD) Lie On Immigration and Enforcement Of Immigration Laws–Back Door Amnesty For Illegal Aliens!–Aiding, Abetting and Promoting Crime In America–Obama Visits Two Sanctuary Cities–Austin and Dallas Texas!

Posted on August 9, 2010. Filed under: Advertising, Books, Communications, Digital Communication, Globalization, Issues, Law, Magazines, Mass Media, News, Newspapers, Politics, Print Media, Radio, Society, Television, Web | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

 

 In 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act.

The bill granted amnesty to about 3 million illegal aliens, mostly from Mexico.

“It’s high time we regained control of our borders and his bill will do this.”
~President Ronald Reagan

  

“If you grant amnesty, the message that you’re sending is that if you come in this country and stay here long enough, we will let you stay. And no one will ever come through the legal process if you do that.”

~Marc Rubio, Florida Republican Senate candidate

  

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free .”

~Ronald Reagan

 

Immigration Excerpt from President Obama’s Interview on the CBS Early Show

Obama’s Backdoor Amnesty Plan?

Here comes Backdoor Amnesty ,To Bypass Congress , Gibbs Lied !!!

Obama’s Scheme to Provide Backdoor Amnesty in the Works

Gov’t Memo Proposes Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants

Amnesty Plan in the Works?

All Presidents of the United States take the following oath of office in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

One of the primary responsibilities of the United States government is to protect each of the states against invasion:

U.S. Constitution, Article 4, Section 4
Section 4 – Republican government

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A4Sec4

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

While nobody knows the exact number of illegal immigrants in the United States, past estimates have ranged from a low of 10 million to over 30 million illegal aliens living and working in the United States.

The United States population in 2010 is about 310 million including illegal immigrants.

Thus illegal immigrants represents between a minimum of 3.3%  to over 10% of the United States population.

 However, illegal immigrants tend to live and work in and around so-called sanctuary cities.

Sanctuary cities do not permit their police departments and other municipal employees to enforce Federal immigration laws by asking illegal immigrants any questions regarding their immigration status.

Below is a map of just some of the United States largest sanctuary cities:

 

For a more detailed and inclusive state by state map go to this web page:

 SANCTUARY CITIES AND STATES ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT INFORMATION RESOURCE

http://www.sanctuarycities.info/

The two major sources of illegal aliens in the United States are those who entered the United States legally with a visa and then over stayed their visas and those crossing into the United States from Mexico, primarily Mexicans and those from other Latin American countries.

For the last twenty years the United States has been invaded by millions of illegal aliens crossing from Mexico into the United States illegally.

Thousands are entering the United States each day by crossing from Mexico.

The Mexican government is actually encouraging their citizens to go to United States and work.

If this is not an invasion, then what is?

The Federal Government under both Republican and Democratic administrations have simply refused to vigorously enforce existing Federal immigration laws for political reasons.

Both Presidents Bush and Obama have failed to honor their oath of office and enforce existing immigration laws.

Why?

The Republican Party wants the financial campaign contributions from businesses that benefit from hiring illegal immigrants.

The Democratic Party also wants the financial campaign contributions from these businesses as well as unions but also the votes of illegal immigrants once a “pathway to citizenship” or amnesty for illegal aliens is passed into law.

Both political parties and the ruling political elites are ignoring the will and sovereignty of the American people who want Federal immigration law enforcement.

The American people want the removal from the workplace of all illegal aliens and their deportation to their country origin.

There are currently over 30 million American citizens looking for full-time employment in the United States.

This is more than twice the 13 million Americans who were looking for work during the worse months of the Great Depression.

There are currently between 10 million and 15 million illegal aliens working in the United States.

Again, nobody knows the exact number.

If the current immigration laws were vigorously enforced and the illegal aliens deported, many of these 10 million to 15 million jobs would require the hiring of currently unemployed American citizens by employers.

President Obama, knowing he is acting like a demigod,would rather accuse those who are insisting that the Federal government enforce immigration laws–as being demigods themselves.

This is a classic example of psychological projection.

Projection, Part 1

 

 

Americans are not anti-immigration.

Americans favor controlled limited legal immigration.

Americans oppose uncontrolled unlimited illegal immigration.

The distinction between legal and illegal immigration is one that President Obama never mentions.

The reason is quite clear, President Obama wants all immigrants, legal and illegal to become United States citizens.

Americans are for the rule of law and the enforcement of the law.

The President knows this and so do the American people.

The President completely misrepresents what is actually occurring by not making the critical and important distinction between legal and illegal immigration.

The American people oppose illegal immigration by margins of 3 and 4 to 1.

A big arrogant despicable lie by a President of the United States is broadcast to millions of Americans.

This is done while his own Administration plots to undermine consensual representative government in the United States by seriously considering an executive order to grant amnesty to million of illegal aliens.

The President knows that  local, city, county or state government and their police forces cannot deport any one that is arrested or detained.

Instead the detainees must be turned over to the Federal government for deportation.

This leaves a record of how many were turned over to the Federal government and how many were eventually deported.

This is a record that the Federal government apparently does not want to create and report to the American people.

Instead, Obama’s Department of Justice challenges any and every state that seriously enforces Federal immigration laws.

Hence the challenge to Arizona’s new law pertaining to immigration law enforcement which mirrors the Federal government’s immigration laws.

Arizona Ruling an Abomination

The American people only want the enforcement of immigration laws by the Federal government.

The Federal government under both Presidents Bush and Obama simply would not vigorously enforce these laws for essentially political reasons.

Instead both Presidents wanted comprehensive immigration reform which at its core is simply amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Both Presidents are substituting the rule of the few for the rule of law.

The American people will not let this tyranny of the ruling elites in Washington D.C. stand.

First the Republicans were turned out in 2006 and 2008 and this November and in 2012 the Democrats will be turned out of office.

President Obama uses strawman arguments and projection to accuse others of what President Obama is actually doing, refusing to vigorously enforce immigration laws and refusing to deport millions of illegal aliens.

The American people want results not a summary of how many resources the President has sent to the American/Mexican borders.

The American people are not so easily fooled or intimidated.

Arizona Should Sue the Department of Justice…

Sheriff Joe Arpaio Bounty…

When Mexican drug dealers put a bounty on an Arizona sheriff for enforcing immigration laws, one begins to wonder why are these drug dealers are on the same side of the argument as President Obama and not the American people.

Whose side is Barack Obama on anyway?

The American people or the criminals?

Americans are beginning to wonder out loud.

Illegal immigrants are not undocumented immigrants–they are illegal aliens or more precisely criminal aliens.

They are criminal aliens who have broken several U.S. laws.

First, illegal aliens enter the United States illegally–crime number 1.

Second, they purchase fraudulent identification documents that they use to obtain employment–crime number 2.

Third, they work for businesses or organizations in the United States–crime number 3.

Fourth, the businesses and organizations who employ them are aiding and abetting criminal activity–crime number 4.

Criminal aliens should be arrested, tried and if found guilty, deported to their country of origin.

The majority of the American people simply want the illegal aliens to go home on their own accord–self-deport.

The roads in America run in both directions.

If you are here illegally, please just leave.

The majority of the American people want enforcement of existing immigration laws.

The majority of the American people oppose amnesty for illegal aliens and a “pathway to citizenship”–you do not reward criminals, you punish them.

The majority of the American people oppose sanctuary cities.

Sanctuary cities are those who refuse to allow their own police to enforce Federal immigration laws which the cities are required to do by Federal law.

Sanctuary cities include Washington, D.C., Chicago, Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Denver, Houston and Dallas to name just a few.

These are cities who refuse to enforce Federal immigration laws and are therefore aiding and abetting criminal activity!

Every day millions of American citizens are unemployed, while millions of criminal aliens are working for employers who benefit from the hiring of illegal aliens.

For example I am writing this post in the sanctuary city of Dallas.

I attended a local community college who in the last ten years constructed two new buildings on its campus.

These buildings were constructed largely by illegal aliens or criminal aliens from Mexico who worked for considerably less money than American construction workers.

Today, these two new buildings and the remaining buildings on campus are cleaned by a janitorial staff consisting mainly of illegal aliens–Mexicans.

The campus police were and are well aware that these workers were and are illegal aliens but did absolutely nothing about it.

Dallas is a sanctuary city or more accurately a criminal city that actively discourages its police officers from enforcing Federal immigration laws by asking any questions about immigration status.

This same situation is repeated in hundreds of towns and cities across the United States daily.

Both Presidents George Bush and Barack Obama broke their oaths of office by refusing to vigorously enforce current immigration laws.

Both were corrupted by power and arrogantly thought that they knew best what was good for the American people.

Instead both Presidents sought comprehensive immigration reform, a code word for amnesty for illegal immigration, despite the opposition of the majority of the American people to illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Who got hurt?

Take the preceding example of the community college.

American citizens should have been hired to construct the two buildings and to clean them once they were built.

These are jobs Americans have done in the past and today still do despite the repeated lies of the American ruling class that these are jobs that Americans will not do–give me a break.

Yes the ruling political elites may not do a job that an illegal alien does, but believe it or not there are millions of hard-working Americans who have in the past and will today do them to earn a living instead of becoming dependent upon the Government for handouts and welfare.

Multiple this by the millions of jobs across the United States over many years and you begin to see the problem.

The ruling political elites of both political parties simply do not give a damn that the American people are demanding–enforcement of existing immigration laws.

Particularly hurt are young hispanic and black Americans where the unemployment rates are extremely high:

Standing up for Jobless Hispanic Americans

HISPANIC AMERICANS STAND AGAINST ILLEGAL ALIENS !!!

The ruling political elites only care about power and staying in office.

Vote these professional politicians of both parties out of power.

Start by voting out of office those in your city, county, school, college, and state government that are aiding and abetting criminal aliens by employing them.

If they are for comprehensive immigration reform or amnesty and open borders, just vote them out of office.

The job you save just might be your own.

Sanctuary Cities Getting Free Pass?

54% Favor Justice Department Action Against Sanctuary Cities

“…Fifty-four percent (54%) of U.S. voters say the Justice Department should take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants. Even more think the federal government should cut off funds to these “sanctuary cities.”

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 30% say the federal government should not take legal action against cities that offer illegal immigrants various forms of sanctuary. Fifteen percent (15%) more are not sure.

The findings are in sharp contrast to voter attitudes about the Justice Department’s decision to challenge a new law in Arizona that attempts to help enforce federal immigration law. Fifty-six percent (56%) oppose the Justice Department’s decision to challenge the legality of Arizona’s new immigration law in federal court. Sixty-one percent (61%), in fact, favor passage of a law like Arizona’s in their own state. …”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/54_favor_justice_department_action_against_sanctuary_cities

Today, President Obama is in Dallas and Austin Texas, two of the many sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce Federal immigration laws.

Has the Department of Justice ever sued any of the so-called sanctuary cities for their failure to enforce the law–no they have not!

Texas Sanctuary Cities
TEXAS HAS ONE OR MORE CITIES OFFERING
ILLEGAL SANCTUARY

Austin, Texas
Baytown, Texas
Brownsville, Texas
Channelview, Texas
Denton, Texas
Dallas, Texas
El Cenizo, Texas
Forth Worth, Texas
Houston, Texas
Katy, Texas
Laredo, Texas
League City, Texas
McAllen, Texas
Port Arthur, Texas
San Antonio, Texas

http://www.sanctuarycities.info/sanctuary_state_texas.htm

Sanctuary Cities – Has the government ever sued them?

Questioning of Arizona Attorney General and ICE Official at Homeland Security Hearing

Mark Levin – Obama To Back Door Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants

Alex Jones: Obama Threatening To Pass “Immigration Reform” By Executive Order

Obama Takes Sides With Illegal Alien Invaders AGAINST Americans!

A Video Fisking of President Obama’s Immigration Speech

  

Virginia targets illegal immigrants

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS6OsWfXJvM

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

 

~Samuel Adams 

 

Background Articles and Videos

Desert Invasion – U.S.

Illegal immigration invasion numbers analysis by Fred Elbel

 

“…The idea for the following analysis is based upon the article titled Could There Be Twenty Million Illegals In The U.S.?”, by D.A. King, THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE FOUNDATION, published on VDARE, August 7, 2004.20 The purpose of this analysis is to present illegal immigration numbers that are more realistic than numbers being presented by the federal government – the very entity responsible for the tidal wave of illegal aliens entering our nation.

This analysis demonstrates that the December, 2003 Department of Homeland Security estimates of 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens in the United States and 700,000 new illegals entering and staying per year represent significant undercounts. This analysis shows that it is reasonable to state that at least 20 million illegal aliens reside in the United States and that up to 12,000 illegal aliens enter the United States every day, or, as Arizona Senator John McCain reports – more than 4 million per year.

This analysis also demonstrates that the proposed White House “guest worker” amnesty proposal of January, 2004 resulted in at least a 25 percent increase in the number of illegal aliens entering into the United States.

The precise number of illegals entering the United States and the exact rate at which they cross our borders is unknown. Official government numbers are often hard to come by and are routinely sanitized. The estimate of the number of illegals who enter depends on Border Patrol apprehension rates and estimates of the number that “got away”. The following sections presents a methodology to estimating the number of illegals and the impact of amnesty proposals on illegal immigration numbers. …”

“…Conclusion

Intentionally low, static, and misleading official government estimates claim that 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens reside in the United States and that 700,000 new illegals enter and stay every year. Based upon the analysis presented here, it is likely that in mid-2005 more than 20 million illegal aliens presently resided in the United States, with roughly 12,000 additional illegal aliens entering every day.

No one can say with certainty how many illegal aliens enter and reside in the United States because the precise data simply are not available. The methodology used in this analysis is presented as an alternative approach to estimating illegal alien numbers. Because it depends on factors that are not known with great accuracy, it produces a wider range of estimates than traditional estimates, but can be used to present another perspective on illegal immigration numbers.

Further analysis is certainly warranted. However it is important to recognize the magnitude of the numbers in order to recognize the seriousness of the crisis and urgency for a return to the rule of law and secured borders that the United States Constitution demands.

http://www.desertinvasion.us/data/invasion_numbers.html#conclusion

  

NO PAROLE OR DEFERRED ACTION FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS, HATCH, 7 OTHERS TELL OBAMA

“…In their letter to the president, Hatch and the other senators wrote that the Obama administration’s immigration policy should not be misused to usurp Congress’ authority.

“While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States,” the senators wrote.

Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.; David Vitter, R-La.; Jim Bunning, R-Ky.; James Inhofe, R-Okla.; Thad Cochran, R-Miss.; and Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., also signed the letter to the president.

A copy of the letter to the president is attached and follows:

June 21, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear President Obama:

We understand that there’s a push for your Administration to develop a plan to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. We understand that the Administration may include aliens who have willfully overstayed their visas or filed for benefits knowing that they will not be eligible for a status for years to come. We understand that deferred action and parole are discretionary actions reserved for individual cases that present unusual, emergent or humanitarian circumstances. Deferred action and parole were not intended to be used to confer a status or offer protection to large groups of illegal aliens, even if the agency claims that they look at each case on a “case-by-case” basis.

While we agree our immigration laws need to be fixed, we are deeply concerned about the potential expansion of deferred action or parole for a large illegal alien population. While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States.

The Administration would be wise to abandon any plans for deferred action or parole for the illegal population. Such a move would further erode the American public’s confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books.

We would appreciate receiving a commitment that the Administration has no plans to use either authority to change the current position of a large group of illegal aliens already in the United States, and ask that you respond to us about this matter as soon as possible. …”

http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=5c7c629c-1b78-be3e-e0c6-81b26b437781

Examiner Editorial: White House provides back-door amnesty
Examiner Editorial
August 2, 2010

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/White-House-provides-a-back-door-to-amnesty-1006426-99725574.html#ixzz0w9JfGWRZ

“…The memo sheds light on why the Justice Department finds Arizona’s immigration law so odious. The law, popularly passed by the state Legislature and signed into law by the governor, is an effort to address the flow of illegal immigrants into the state by allowing Arizona police officers to detain illegal immigrants. But the police are not empowered to deport the illegals — instead, the detainees are referred to the federal government. This would create a record of the illegal immigrants the administration refuses to deport, making transparent the White House’s efforts to undermine current immigration law.

The memo is clear on this point: The federal government can use “deferred action” at its discretion in halting a deportation indefinitely (usually for a humanitarian reason). “This would permit individuals for whom relief may become available in the future to live and work in the U.S. without fear of removal.” But to do so would require justification and a paper trail, two things the administration has worked hard to avoid. The memo reveals as much: “While it is theoretically possible to grant deferred action to an unrestricted number of unlawfully present individuals, doing so would likely be controversial, not to mention expensive.” It’s controversial because it would attract attention, unlike other stealth measures proposed in the memo that could be implemented without alerting the public — such as expanding the definition of “extreme hardship,” which would enable virtually any illegal immigrant to qualify for an exemption from deportation.

There is one bright side to this scandal. If politicians continue to ignore the democratic process and the voters, the voters will use the democratic process to have their say in November.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/White-House-provides-a-back-door-to-amnesty-1006426-99725574.html#ixzz0w9JHgpZY

Nationally, 60% Favor Letting Local Police Stop and Verify Immigration Status
“…Arizona Governor Jan Brewer last week signed a new law into effect that authorizes local police to stop and verify the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant. A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 60% of voters nationwide favor such a law, while 31% are opposed.

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Republicans support the law along with 62% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Democratic voters are evenly divided on the measure.

At the same time, however, 58% of all voters are at least somewhat concerned that “efforts to identify and deport illegal immigrants will also end up violating the civil rights of some U.S. citizens.” That figure includes 29% who are Very Concerned about possible civil rights violations.

Voter support for empowering local police comes at a time when most voters (56%) believe it is unlikely Congress will take action to gain control of the border. Only 31% say Congress is even somewhat likely to take such an action. That figure includes just 10% who believe Congress is Very Likely to act. …”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/nationally_60_favor_letting_local_police_stop_and_verify_immigration_status

Michael Savage- Obama’s Immigration Speech

Immigration to play a factor for November elections

 
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Discussion #3: Brand Loyalty–Brand and Price–Some examples

Posted on August 7, 2010. Filed under: Advertising, Communications, Digital Communication, Magazines, Mass Media, Newspapers, Print Media, Radio, Television | Tags: , , , , |

Hello Everyone!

Here is a little story about your professor:
On Saturday I was shopping at one of my favorite shoe stores- Payless. Imagine my excitement when I see that one of their brands (Champion, to be exact) has made an alternative version of Sketchers Shape-Ups and Reebok Easy Tones (google these if you do not know what they are). A pair of the Sketchers are roughly $80-110 white the Reeboks range about $120 a pair. The Champion version- which look the very same and “supposedly” do the same thing- were only $29 (I actually paid $26 because I had a coupon).
It is  no secret that generic brands are cheaper than Name Brands.
Safeway “Honey-O’s” are nearly $1 cheaper than Cheerios.
How can a company make the same product so much cheaper? A few reasons:
-Advertising/ Marketing costs and budgets for large companies such as Kraft and General Mills are higher than for “Always Save,” etc… In some cases, the consumer pays more for the marketing and packaging of a product than for the product itself.
-Brand Loyalty. If I will only eat Cheerio’s, then by gosh I will spend that extra buck to eat Cheerio’s – which is actually a complete lie for me- I am cheap.
But there are some products of which I will only buy the name brand. For example, Soda- I will only buy and drink Diet Dr. Pepper. No Wal-Mart brand tastes the same.
So, for this discussion board, I want you to talk about products to which you are loyal, and ones where generic brands will do.
Talk to your family, you spouse, your friends. What products are the picky about?
This board is Due no later than Wednesday, July 21 at 5 p.m.

For shaving cream I buy Barbasol.

For diet soda I buy Big K at Kroger because it is cheaper than Coke.

For peanut butter and bread I buy Kroger’s cheapest.

Kroger has a value brand category that is  the cheapest.

For breakfast cereal I buy the Kroger brand for corn flakes and fruity rice crisps.

For batteries I buy Ravovac because they are the cheapest.

I usually do not buy a national brand because they are usually the most expensive and you can invariably find a product of equal or greater quality and much lower price.

Compare Kroger prices with those of the national brands and you will see what I mean.

You can get a box of  saltine crackers for less than $1 or  pay nearly $2 for a national brand name. I buy the Kroger discount value brand for this as well.

I just noticed this new discussion topic after I posted the one due at 5.

Raymond

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Unit 6–Part 2-Careers in Advertising

Posted on August 6, 2010. Filed under: Advertising, Books, Communications, Digital Communication, Ethics, Issues, Magazines, Mass Media, News, Newspapers, Politics, Print Media, Public Relations, Radio, Television, Web, Web Banner | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

 

PART 2 Careers in Advertising. THIS IS YOUR FINAL
 
Review the following link:
For this assignment, you will find one person who works in advertising and interview them. Find out their background, why they chose advertising, what they studied in college, and a full job description. You will write a 1,200-word report on this person from the information you have gathered. Be sure to include in your report their name and where this person works. 
This assignment is due Thursday, August 12 at NOON!
 I WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY LATE ASSIGNMENTS PAST noon on Thursday, August 12. I will be turning in grades on Friday at 8 a.m. and will not be able to change your grade after that.

How To Get A Job In Advertising

 Matryoshka Dolls with Olga & Dema

 

“When you are appointed to head an office in the Ogilvy & Mather chain, I send you one of these Russian dolls. Inside the smallest you will find this message: ‘If each of us hires people who are smaller than we are, we shall become a company of dwarfs, but if each of us hires people who are bigger than we are, Ogilvy & Mather will become a company of giants.’:

~David Ogilvy, Ogilvy On Advertising, page 46.

 

 

A conversation about advertising, with David Ogilvy

David Ogilvy interviewed by John Crichton in 1977. Realized by the American Association of Advertising Agencies AAAA. David is seen as the “pope of advertising”. This is the complete interview version.

While in the past I have never considered a career in advertising, I recently read the late David Ogilvy’s books, Confessions of An Advertising Man and Ogilvy On Advertising to learn more about career opportunities in advertising and advertising agencies.

 

 

 I highly recommend reading both books for any one interested in a career in advertising or mass communications and for business owners and executives interested in growing their businesses.

David Ogilvy started his own advertising agency in 1948.

Today Ogilvy & Mather is one of the top ten marketing communication firms worldwide and employs over 15,000 people in 450 offices around the world with a tradition  for training and developing their talent. Ogilvy & Mather is part of the WPP family of companies.

Ogilvy & Mather

http://www.ogilvy.com/Careers.aspx

According to Ogilvy advertising offers four different career paths:

  1. You can join a television network, a radio station, a magazine or a newspaper and sell time or space to advertisers and their agencies.
  2. You can join a retailer like Sears Roebeck, and work as a copywriter, art director or advertising manager.
  3. You can join a manufacturing company like Procter & Gamble, and work as a brand manager.
  4. You can join an advertising agency.

Source: Ogilvy On Advertising, page 31.

I would most likely pursue the career path of working for a leading advertising agency such as the following:

All of the above advertising agencies are owned by British marketing giant WPP http://www.wpp.com/wpp/companies/

WPP http://www.wpp.com/wpp/

Since I live in Dallas, Texas I would also be interested in working for a local Dallas advertising agency such as the Richards Group http://www.richards.com/index.html# or the local Dallas office of ReachLocal http://reachlocal33-px.rtrk.com/ .

There are several jobs in advertising agencies including the following:

  1. Account executive
  2. Art director
  3. Copywriter
  4. Creative director
  5. Media director
  6. Researcher/Analyst
  7. Program Director

Actual job or position descriptions from the Ogilvy & Mather web site are provided at the end of this essay.

With over twenty years of experience in the financial services industry, sales, and running my own firm, the positions that most interested me are account executive, copywriter, researcher/analyst and program director.

An account executive or in earlier times the contact man is responsible for representing the agency to the client and getting the best possible work from the various agency departments for the client.

A copywriter is responsible for writing interesting prose for print media and dialogue for broadcast media ( television and radio).

Media director is responsible for all aspects of client’s media services.

A researcher/analyst conducts surveys, writes reports and provides answer to questions.

Market research is information on the market, competition, prospects, distribution and pricing.

Advertising research is information directly related to an advertising campaign including the development, pretesting, and evaluation of the actual advertising campaign or materials.

A program director is responsible for assembling and managing teams to deliver work.

Since I do not know anybody that works in an advertising agency to interview, I decided to first interview Marshall Siegel, the Advertising Advisor for Richland College, School of Human & Academic Development, who has over thirty-seven experience in advertising  with a trade magazine publisher where he had numerous positions in all departments except media. 

Marshall Siegel is a graduate of the University of Missouri, School of Journalism. After college, his first job was with the Chicago Tribune, formerly self-styled as the “World’s Greatest Newspaper” (for which WGN radio and television is named). When the Korean War broke out, he was called up by the U.S. Army and served in Korea as a private first class. Siegel subsequently joined the Army Reserves and retired years latter as a Major.

After completing his active duty military service, he returned to the Chicago Tribune.  At the time he was paid only $35 per week and decided for financial reasons to take a higher paying position selling advertising space for a firm that publishes trade magazines.

After thirty-seven years with the trade magazine publishing company, the company was sold to a British firm for forty million dollars in cash.

Siegal retired soon thereafter when the British firm wanted one of their executives to manage the company.

Siegel now assists students at Richland College as an advertising and writing coach and as Advertising Advisor to Richland College. When advertisers want to post their ads on the Richland College campus, he is the person you go to get your ad approved and stamped. Place you ads only on cement walls and be sure to take them down after two weeks!

He loves owning and driving Porsches and carries photos of his “babies” in his wallet.

Siegel recommended that with my financial services and sales background I approach an advertising agency about selling advertising of financial publications to prospects and clients of the advertising agency.

He suggested I go to the main library in Plano or Dallas and look up the names of the agencies that I was interested in working for in the Advertising Red Books to determine who the advertising agency’s clients were.

 

“…The Advertising Redbooks Standard Directory of Advertising Agencies January Edition (S11) 2010

Each Volume 1 Advertisers $ 1495.00 AS LISTED TO BE ORDERED FROM THIS SECTION
Each Volume II AGENCIES $1495.00
CD-ROM; CONTAINS Both These Volumes is $1995.00

PLEASE CALL AT 905 946 9588 OR EMAIL US at sales@ippbooks.com

The Advertising Redbooks’ defines useful agency-to-advertiser relationships for prospecting and competitive intelligence research. …”

 http://www.ippbooks.com/store/advertising-red-book-advertising-agencies-of-the-usa.html

Siegel also recommended that I obtain for selected financial publications their advertising rates from the SDRS directory at the library:

“…”For 90 years, SRDS has built and maintained the largest and most comprehensive database of media rates and data in the world, including:

-Magazines
-Newspapers
-Television & Radio Stations
-Online Sites
-Out-of-Home Venues
-Direct Marketing Lists …”

http://www.wpp.com/wpp/companies/companydetail.htm?id=532

WPP acquired SDRS in 2009.

SRDS Portal

http://www.srds.com/portal/servlet/LoginServlet

Siegel also recommended that I send a letter or e-mail to the founder or head of the advertising agency expressing by interest in working for his agency.

I indicated that I was more interested in a creative position in advertising such as copywriter for I write every day on a blog and have published over sixty videos on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/user/raymondpronk and designed and developed a number of web sites on famous artists

Siegel suggested that I talked to the new editor and chief of the Richland Chronicle for they need to hire someone to do their website http://www.richlandchronicle.com/#5 , which I did. 

The one agency in Dallas that most impresses me is the Richards Group founded by Stan Richards.

2010 JA Dallas Business Hall of Fame Laureate – Stan Richards

I still remember participating in a focus group  one evening for The Richards Group.

A group of individuals in the financial services were there to review the advertising and marketing materials for a financial services client of  The Richards Group.

I will be reading his book next:

 Another firm that interests me is ReachLocal that is relatively new and has just opened an office in Dallas.

ReachLocal has a unique system that gets prospects for advertisers.

ReachLocal Vision

ReachLocal Promo – What We Do

ReachLocal Promo – How It Works

 

How It Works: The ReachLocal Platform

 

Job Descriptions

From Actual Job Open Positions At Ogilvy & Mather

Account Executive

“…Responsibilities:  

  • Responsible for the smooth week-by week running of the account and the effective management of all Client projects
  • Develops positive, proactive relationships with Client and Agency team creating a stimulating environment within which the best work can develop
  • Begins to develop people management skills by coaching and developing their reports and by demonstrating an ability to effectively delegate both up and down.
  • As the Account Executive moves towards promotion to Account Supervisor he/she will begin to show leadership and drive in thinking of innovative solutions to business/strategic problems and in merchandising the Agency’s services
  • Understands challenges facing Client’s business in the short-term
  • Makes it their business to know all aspects of competitive activity
  • Develops an understanding of the motivations/behaviour patterns of consumers in the marketplace by attending focus groups/ quantitative debriefs, store visits etc.
  • Goes to lengths to gain a thorough understanding of all aspects of the brand – from reading reports, visiting factories/stores and talking to sales force to using/experiencing the product/service
  • Supports planners in developing ideas and stimulus for research
  • Actively contributes to discussions on strategy and advertising development
  • Works with Account Director and Planner to develop inspirational briefings for Creatives
  • Keeps in regular contact with Creatives during development of ideas, keeping them supplied with any useful stimulus and helping to ensure they remain motivated and enthusiastic
  • Keeps Client involved in the development process to build their confidence and enable them to buy braver ideas.
  • Has mastered a range of presentation techniques and works with the Account Director to identify the most appropriate and inspiring way to present and sell each piece of creative work
  • Be a sound judge of creative work, able to coherently argue the case for or against creative work based on the brief and factual accuracy, both internally and with the Client …”

http://careers.ogilvy.com/private/myjobs/openjob_outside.jsp?a=3jdo4jjibi1r49wrf9pgq9n9b2pvqyz45f4wjbysqnrh3rk24g6avteuh5ueleox0&from=COMP&id=2333306&SearchString=+Account+executive+&StatesString=

Art Director

“…Responsibilities:

  • Generate original concepts in partnership with copywriter
  • Manage multiple deadlines/projects
  • Present creative to senior management, account teams and clients
  • Be a brand expert and steward for clients and Ogilvy
  • Cast (or assist with casting) talent for TV/radio/photo shoots and attend production/editing
  • Liaise with production companies, photographers, typographers, designers and printers

 http://careers.ogilvy.com/private/myjobs/openjob_outside.jsp?a=3jdo4jjibi1r49wrf9pgq9n9b2pvqyz45f4wjbysqnrh3rk24g6avteuh5ueleox0&from=COMP&id=2325403&SearchString=Art+Director&StatesString=

Copywriter

“…Responsibilities:

  • Generate original concepts in partnership with art director
  • Write strategically sound headlines and body copy for digital, print and broadcast deliverables
  • Manage multiple deadlines/projects
  • Present creative to clients
  • Keep breast of cultural and industry trends
  • Become a brand expert and steward for both clients and Ogilvy
  • Cast (or assist with casting) actors for TV/radio/photo shoots and attend production/editing
  • Liaise with production companies, photographers, typographers, designers and printers

http://careers.ogilvy.com/private/myjobs/openjob_outside.jsp?a=3jdo4jjibi1r49wrf9pgq9n9b2pvqyz45f4wjbysqnrh3rk24g6avteuh5ueleox0&from=COMP&id=2325396&SearchString=Copywriter&StatesString=

 

Media Director

“…Responsibilities:

  • Oversight on all aspects of client’s media services
  • Responsible for overall media objectives and strategies that fulfill client business objectives
  • Lead creation of all important plans and presentations
  • Demonstrate thought leadership and innovation for enhanced media plans and results
  • Foster cross-agency relationships with account, production, and outside partners
  • Train, motivate & develop Media Supervisors, Media Planners, Assistant Media Planners

http://careers.ogilvy.com/private/myjobs/openjob_outside.jsp?a=3jdo4jjibi1r49wrf9pgq9n9b2pvqyz45f4wjbysqnrh3rk24g6avteuh5ueleox0&from=COMP&id=2280700&SearchString=Media+Director&StatesString=

Researcher/Analyst

“…Responsibilities

Assist senior analytic staff with various analytic projects for experiential , shopper, and promotional campaigns

Retrieve raw data gathered from field or market activities and synthesize it into usable forms for account team usage

Join multiple sources of data into one, normalized dataset

Provide analysis beyond reporting basic facts, such as regression, cluster and factor analysis, and simple tests for statistical significance

Maintain library of analytics case studies used to develop industry benchmarks

Produce analytics reports from both custom and template designs

Manage time spent against multiple projects, ensuring deadlines are maintained and met

Assist in writing of reports

Some client-facing responsibilities …:

http://careers.ogilvy.com/private/myjobs/openjob_outside.jsp?a=3jdo4jjibi1r49wrf9pgq9n9b2pvqyz45f4wjbysqnrh3rk24g6avteuh5ueleox0&from=COMP&id=2335156&SearchString=Research&StatesString=Program

Program Director

“…Responsibilities:  

  • Will work primarily on the digital side of the business, including such projects as: 
    • Tutorials 
    • New product launches 
    • Various TWC.com site initiatives 
    • TWC online Applications 
  • Scoping new projects and recognizing changes to current scope 
  • Should be familiar with key disciplines and their processes for delivering work (IA, Creative, Content Strategy, Project Management, Strategy, Engineering, Usability, etc.) 
  • Working with other disciplines (especially digital project management) to assemble and manage teams to deliver work 
  • Project plan development and risk planning 
  • Reviewing actuals to track profitability of projects and course correct if necessary 
  • Day-to-day client contact and advisement 
  • Presentation writing and presenting skills, meeting facilitation skills  …”

http://careers.ogilvy.com/private/myjobs/openjob_outside.jsp?a=3jdo4jjibi1r49wrf9pgq9n9b2pvqyz45f4wjbysqnrh3rk24g6avteuh5ueleox0&from=COMP&id=2335529&SearchString=executive+&StatesString=

“The biggest problem which besets almost every agency is the problem of producing good campaigns. Copywriters, art directors, and television producers are easily come by, but the number of men who can preside over an agency’s entire creative output – perhaps a hundred new campaigns every year – can be numbered on the fingers of one hand. These rare trumpeter swans must be capable of inspiring a motley crew of writers and artists; they must be sure-footed judges of campaigns for a wide range of different products; they must be good presenters; and they must have a colossal appetite for midnight oil.”

    ~David Ogilvy, Confessions of an Advertising Man, 1971, New York:

 

David Ogilvy made it very clear what he wanted when he advertised for a Creative Director for Ogilvy & Mather International:

Trumpeter Swans

In my experience, there are five kinds of Creative Director:

1. Sound on strategy, dull on execution.

2.Good managers who don’t make waves…and don’t produce brilliant campaigns either.

3. Duds.

4. The genius who is a lousy leader.

5. TRUMPETER SWANS

     who combine personal genius with inspiring leadership.

      We have an opening for one of these rare birds in one of our offices overseas.

     Write in inviolable secrecy to me,

     David Ogilvy, Touffou, 86300 Bonnes, France.

    Signed David Ogilvy

~Source: Ogilvy On Advertising, page 48

Ultimate Animal Dads: Trumpeter Swans

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnqkfglZI2Q&feature=related

 

The Trumpeter Swan

 

A Trumpeter Swan looking for a new career opportunity with an advertising agency.

 

Background Information

The Pope of Modern Advertising – David Ogilvy

 

http://www.hulu.com/watch/46488/the-david-susskind-show-the-pope-of-modern-advertising—david-ogilvy

David Ogilvy: We Sell or Else

David MacKenzie Ogilvy

“…David MacKenzie Ogilvy, CBE, (June 23, 1911–July 21, 1999), was a notable advertising executive. He has often been called “The Father of Advertising.” In 1962, Time called him “the most sought-after wizard in today’s advertising industry.” [1] He was known for a career of expanding the bounds of both creativity and morality in advertising. …”

“…The Ogilvy & Mather years (1949–1973)

After working as a chef, researcher, and farmer, Ogilvy started his agency with the backing of Mather and Crowther, the London agency being run by his elder brother, Francis, which later acquired another London agency, S. H. Benson. The new agency in New York was called Ogilvy, Benson, and Mather. David Ogilvy had just $6,000 in his account when he started the agency. He writes in Confessions of an Advertising Man that initially, he struggled to get clients. Ogilvy also admitted (referring to the pioneer of British advertising Bobby Bevan, the chairman of Benson) “I was in awe of him but Bevan never took notice of me!” They would meet later, however.[3]

Ogilvy & Mather was built on David Ogilvy’s principles, in particular, that the function of advertising is to sell and that successful advertising for any product is based on information about its consumer.

His entry into the company of giants started with several iconic advertising campaigns:

“The man in the Hathaway shirt” with his aristocratic eye patch which used Baron George Wrangell as model; “The man from Schweppes is here” introduced Commander Edward Whitehead, the elegant bearded Brit, bringing Schweppes (and “Schweppervesence”) to the U.S.; a famous headline in the automobile business, “At 60 miles an hour the loudest noise in this new Rolls-Royce comes from the electric clock”; “Pablo Casals is coming home – to Puerto Rico”, a campaign which Ogilvy said helped change the image of a country, and was his proudest achievement.

One of his greatest successes was “Only Dove is one-quarter moisturizing cream”. This campaign helped Dove become the top selling soap in the U.S.

Ogilvy believed that the best way to get new clients was to do notable work for his existing clients. Success in his early campaigns helped Ogilvy get big clients such as Rolls-Royce and Shell. New clients followed and Ogilvy’s company grew quickly.

In 1973 Ogilvy retired as Chairman of Ogilvy & Mather and moved to Touffou, his estate in France. While no longer involved in the agency’s day-to-day operations, he stayed in touch with the company. His correspondence so dramatically increased the volume of mail handled in the nearby town of Bonnes that the post office was reclassified at a higher status and the postmaster’s salary raised.

Ogilvy & Mather linked with H.H.D Europe in 1972. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ogilvy_(businessman)

Russia-Matryoshka doll class

SRDS sale gives WPP an unfair advantage

“…This affects the direct marketing industry because SRDS provides a research system that is used for making mailing list purchasing decisions and formulating media plans. List managers use SRDS to promote their lists. List brokers and mailers use SRDS to make list selections.

WPP Group is a huge advertising agency holding company with an estimated 100,000 employees and £6.18 billion revenue in 2007. A big part of WPP’s revenue is commissions from media purchases done by their stable of advertising agencies. It’s a good strategy for WPP to buy SRDS because it will give them better insight into media purchases that happen outside of WPP. They can use SRDS’ database to better calculate their market share and to develop laser-focused strategies to acquire the share they don’t already own.

If I were a list broker, I’d be really nervous about this.

After all, list brokers compete with WPP agencies for their commissions (i.e. their livelihood). If WPP owns their list research system, it would provide WPP with powerful insights that enable them to steal the business away from list brokers and move those commissions to WPP agencies.

Imagine if your competitor could see all your research and proposals before you publish them. They would eat your lunch! …”

http://blog.nextmark.com/2008/11/srds-sale-gives-wpp-an-unfair-advantage.html

The Richards Group

“…The Richards Group is an American advertising agency. It is the largest independently owned agency in the country.[citation needed]

Based in Dallas, Texas, The Richards Group reports annual billings approaching $1.25 billion. Memorable work includes the iconic Chick-fil-A Cows (“Eat Mor Chikin”)[1], the Motel 6 campaign featuring Tom Bodett, and the dialogue-free Corona Beer TV commercials set on tropical beaches.

Major clients include Baby Magic[2], Fruit of the Loom, Home Depot, Sub-Zero/Wolf, and Zales. The agency handles advertising, public relations, and promotions for dozens of clients nationwide, in addition to sports/entertainment marketing for colleges and universities.

In the 3rd quarter of 2009, PODS signed The Richards Group as their creative agency.[3]

The Richards Group is associated by common ownership with Houston advertising agency Richards/Carlberg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Richards_Group

Trumpet of the swan – Ogilvy & Mather Chairman and CEO Rochelle Lazarus

“…In 1994, IBM stunned the marketing world by consolidating its $500 million advertising account, parceled among 40 agencies, into just one. It was the largest account switch ever and at its center was Shelley Lazarus, then the president and COO of WPP Group’s Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide.

Named chief executive last fall, on April 30 Lazarus inherited the chairman’s baton from Charlotte Beers, the 61-year-old dynamic Texan who became the first female chief executive in O&M’s history in 1992. Heading the $7.6 billion agency that legendary adman David Ogilvy founded in 1948, whose clients include Duracell, Ford, Kimberly Clark, Shell Oil, Jaguar, Sears Roebuck, Eastman Kodak, and American Express, makes Lazarus the most powerful woman in advertising – not bad for someone who couldn’t find work 25 years ago.

“Other agencies wouldn’t hire me, claiming they didn’t want to alienate the wives of account executives with whom I’d have to work late,” Lazarus recalls. But O&M took her on in 1971 as an assistant and a few years later – when she was six months pregnant – named her its first female account executive. With the exception of a hiatus in 1974 to follow her husband on a two-year posting at a Dayton, OH, Air Force base and care for their newborn, she has spent virtually her entire career at O&M. On returning to New York, she rejoined the firm and was soon running O&M Direct, the unit responsible for “junk mail.” Considered “off-the-path” at the time, Lazarus found direct marketing “a specialty with enormous profit potential,” and parlayed the job into a launch pad for posts as president of the New York office and president of Ogilvy North America. …”

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4070/is_n124/ai_19694503/

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

News Journal: Number 05, July 26, 2010, Wikileaks and Julian Assange

Posted on August 5, 2010. Filed under: Issues, Law, Magazines, Mass Media, News, Newspapers, Politics, Print Media, Radio, Society, Television, Web | Tags: , |

 “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ” 

“If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” 

~George Washington

Wikileaks Paint Grim Afghan Picture

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfQZm4vWYoY

  

Wikileaks Releases Secret Afghan War Documents

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange: PFC Bradley Manning is effectively like a Guantanamo detainee 

EXCLUSIVE Julian Assange on the Afghanistan war logs + Links + Downloads + How to video

Wikileaks Afghanistan War Logs: Massive leak of secret files exposes truth about war

WikiLeaks 90,000+ Secret Military Docs Part 5/7 – Democracy NOW!

Glenn Greenwald on Wikileaks Hunt – June 17, 2010 Democracy NOW!

Assange/Ellsberg/Jonsdottir on ABC-News Pt.1/3

Assange/Ellsberg/Jonsdottir on ABC-News Pt.2/3

Assange/Ellsberg/Jonsdottir on ABC-News Pt.3/3

Julian Assange: Why the world needs WikiLeaks

Wikileaks – Iceland

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCmjmDXp7TI  

Daniel Ellsberg fears a US hit on Wikileaks founder Julian Assange

WikiLeaks editor on Apache combat video: No excuse for US killing civilians

Pentagon vs. Wikileaks, GATA vs. CFTC, Police vs. Everyone – Sunday Update

Amy Goodman Reports on “Collateral Murder” WikiLeaks Video

Alex Jones Discusses Wikileaks Release Of Pentagon Snuff Video

Wikileaks on the Culture Show – Friday 29th January 2010

Julian Assange

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange 

The Whistleblower 1 of 2 – Julian Assange report on SBS’s Dateline by Mark Davis struth1969

The Whistleblower 2 of 2 – Julian Assange report on SBS’s Dateline by Mark Davis struth1969

Wikileaks Releases Thousands Text Messages From September 11, 2001

Wikileaks….

 

Ron Paul: A New Hope

“Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all.”

~George Washington 

 

“The essence of the interventionist policy is to take from one group to give to another. It is confiscation and distribution.” 

“Economic nationalism, the necessary complement of domestic interventionism, hurts the interests of foreign peoples and thus creates international conflict. It suggests the idea of amending this unsatisfactory state of affairs by war.” 

~Ludwig von Mises

Government intervention in the domestic economy and government intervention in other countries invariably leads to more government intervention to correct the problems created by previous government interventions. The root problem is government intervention.  

People want to be left alone to lead their lives, but the government or state run by political elites cannot leave the people alone.   The political elites or political class needs to justify their existence by imposing their views or ideology on others. Nearly nine years after 9/11 Americans soldiers are still fighting and dying in Afghanistan and Pakistan.   

The American people demand results not new laws limiting free speech or the prosecution of leakers. The American people demand that government intervention both abroad in the form of nation building or at home in the form of wealth redistribution be stopped.   

The American people demand that the American family comes first and the Federal Government be limited in both scope and size. Bring all of America’s professional soldiers home.  

Just Do It. Instead the American political class of both political parties are demanding that the receiver and publisher of the leaked information be indicted and jailed.  

If he broke U.S. law, just do it.However, it is the gross incompetence of both the civilian and military commanders that enabled these documents to be leaked in the first place.  

Yes, the lives of individuals and their families who assisted American and NATO forces are now at risk from the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.This is exactly why access to this information should have been tightly controlled. 

While those who leaked this sensitive and secret information should be prosecuted, so too should the heads of major Federal departments and agencies who failed to adequately supervise access to these documents.Instead those who make the information known are now the villains.  

Building other nations is neither  the function nor role of the United States Government.

Repeating this mistake over and over again is insanity.  

Government intervention is the problem, not the solution. 

“All this passionate praise of the supereminence of government action is but a poor disguise for the individual interventionists self-deification. The great god State is a great god only because it is expected to do exclusively what the individual advocate of interventionism wants to see achieved.”  

“An essential point in the social philosophy of interventionism is the existence of an inexhaustible fund which can be squeezed forever. The whole system of interventionism collapses when this fountain is drained off: The Santa Claus principle liquidates itself.”  

~Ludwig von Mises 

  

 

Background Articles and Videos

Victor Davis Hanson (1/6)

Victor Davis Hanson (2/6)

Victor Davis Hanson (3/6)

Victor Davis Hanson (4/6)

Victor Davis Hanson (5/6)

Victor Davis Hanson (6/6)

The George Bush You Forgot

THE BEST DEFENSE: Preventive War

Thomas Barnett: The Pentagon’s new map for war and peace

Mission Impossible? Deconstructing Counter-insurgency in Afghanistan

Victor Davis Hanson: War in the Post Modern World – why the new laws of conflict are surreal

 

Julian Assange: Is WikiLeaks Biased?

WikiLeaks Release 1.0 (1/7)

WikiLeaks Release 1.0 (2/7)

WikiLeaks Release 1.0 (3/7)

WikiLeaks Release 1.0 (4/7)

WikiLeaks Release 1.0 (5/7)

WikiLeaks Release 1.0 (6/7)

WikiLeaks Release 1.0 (7/7)

  

Wikileaks 

“…Wikileaks is an amorphous, international organization, based in Sweden,[1] that publishes anonymous submissions and leaks of sensitive documents from governments and other organizations, while preserving the anonymity of their sources. Its website, launched in 2006, is run by The Sunshine Press.[2] The organization has stated it was founded by Chinese dissidents, as well as journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the U.S., Taiwan, Europe, Australia, and South Africa.[3] Newspaper articles and The New Yorker magazine (June 7, 2010) describe Julian Assange, an Australian journalist and Internet activist, as its director.[4] Within a year of its launch, the site said its database had grown to more than 1.2 million documents;[5] while the “Collateral Murder” video is one of its most notable releases.[6][7] It has won a number of new media awards for its reports. …” 

Wikileaks went public in January 2007, when it first appeared on the Web.[8] The site states that it was “founded by Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians and start-up company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa”.[3] The creators of Wikileaks were unidentified as of January 2007[update],[9] although it has been represented in public since January 2007 by non-anonymous speakers such as Julian Assange, who had described himself as a member of Wikileaks’ advisory board[10] and was later referred to as the “founder of Wikileaks”.[11] As of June 2009[update], the site had over 1,200 registered volunteers[3] and listed its advisory board as consisting of Assange, Phillip Adams, Wang Dan, CJ Hinke, Ben Laurie, Tashi Namgyal Khamsitsang, Xiao Qiang, Chico Whitaker, and Wang Youcai.[12] Despite appearing on the list, when contacted by Mother Jones magazine in 2010, Khamsitsangs said he received an e-mail from Wikileaks, but never agreed to be an advisor.[13] 

Wikileaks states that its “primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations.”[3][14] 

In January 2007, the website stated that it had over 1.2 million leaked documents that it was preparing to publish.[15] An article in The New Yorker said that “one of the WikiLeaks activists owned a server that was being used as a node for the Tor network. Millions of secret transmissions passed through it. The activist noticed that hackers from China were using the network to gather foreign governments’ information, and began to record this traffic. Only a small fraction has ever been posted on WikiLeaks, but the initial tranche served as the site’s foundation, and Assange was able to say, “We have received over one million documents from thirteen countries.””[16] Assange responded to such statements by saying “the imputation is incorrect. The facts concern a 2006 investigation into Chinese espionage one of our contacts were involved in. Somewhere between none and handful of those documents were ever released on WikiLeaks. Non-government targets of the Chinese espionage, such as Tibetan associations were informed (by us)”.[17] The group has subsequently released a number of other significant documents which have become front-page news items, ranging from documentation of equipment expenditures and holdings in the Afghanistan war to corruption in Kenya.[18] 

Their stated goal is to ensure that whistle-blowers and journalists are not jailed for emailing sensitive or classified documents, as happened to Chinese journalist Shi Tao, who was sentenced to 10 years in 2005 after publicising an email from Chinese officials about the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.[19] 

The project has drawn comparisons to Daniel Ellsberg’s leaking of the Pentagon Papers in 1971.[20] In the United States, the leaking of some documents may be legally protected. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Constitution guarantees anonymity, at least in the area of political discourse.[20] Author and journalist Whitley Strieber has spoken about the benefits of the Wikileaks project, noting that “Leaking a government document can mean jail, but jail sentences for this can be fairly short. However, there are many places where it means long incarceration or even death, such as China and parts of Africa and the Middle East.”[21] 

The site has won a number of awards, including the 2008 Economist magazine New Media Award,[22] and in June 2009, Wikileaks and Julian Assange won Amnesty International UK’s Media Award 2009 (in the category “New Media”) for the 2008 publication of “Kenya: The Cry of Blood – Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances”,[23] a report by the Kenyan National Commission on Human Rights about police killings in Kenya.[24] In May 2010 it was rated number 1 of “websites that could totally change the news”.[6] 

Suspension of activity, fundraising

On 24 December 2009, Wikileaks announced that it was experiencing a shortage of funds[25] and suspended all access to its website except for a form to submit new material.[26] Material that was previously published was no longer available, although some could still be accessed on unofficial mirrors.[27][28] Wikileaks stated on its website that it would resume full operation once the operational costs were covered.[26][29] Wikileaks saw this as a kind of strike “to ensure that everyone who is involved stops normal work and actually spends time raising revenue”.[30] While it was initially hoped that funds could be secured by 6 January 2010,[31] it was only on 3 February 2010 that WikiLeaks announced that its minimum fundraising goal had been achieved.[32] 

On 22 January 2010, PayPal suspended Wikileaks’ donation account and froze its assets. Wikileaks said that this had happened before, and was done for “no obvious reason”.[33] The account was restored on 25 January 2010.[34] 

On May 18, 2010, WikiLeaks announced that its website and archive were back up.[35] 

As of June 2010, Wikileaks was a finalist for a grant of more than half a million dollars from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation,[36] but did not make the cut.[37] Wikileaks commented, “Wikileaks was highest rated project in the Knight challenge, strongly recommended to the board but gets no funding. Go figure”. Wikileaks said that the Knight foundation announced the award to “’12 Grantees who will impact future of news’ — but not WikiLeaks” and questioned whether Knight foundation was “really looking for impact”.[37] A spokesman of the Knight Foundation disputed parts of WikiLeaks’ statement, saying “WikiLeaks was not recommended by Knight staff to the board.”[38] However, he declined to say whether WikiLeaks was the project rated highest by the Knight advisory panel, which consists of non-staffers, among them journalist Jennifer 8. Lee, who has done PR work for WikiLeaks with the press and on social networking sites.[38] 

On July 17, Jacob Appelbaum spoke on behalf of WikiLeaks at the 2010 Hackers on Planet Earth conference in New York City, replacing Assange due to the presence of federal agents at the conference.[39][40] He announced that the WikiLeaks submission system was again up and running, after it had been temporarily suspended.[39][41] Assange was a surprise speaker at a TED conference on 19 July 2010 in Oxford, and confirmed that WikiLeaks was now accepting submissions again.[42][43] 

 Staff and funding

According to a January 2010 interview, the Wikileaks team then consisted of five people working full-time and about 800 people who worked occasionally, none of whom were compensated.[30] Wikileaks has no official headquarters. The expenses per year are about €200,000, mainly for servers and bureaucracy, but would reach €600,000 if work currently done by volunteers were paid for.[30] Wikileaks does not pay for lawyers, as hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal support have been donated by media organisations such as the Associated Press, The Los Angeles Times, and the National Newspaper Publishers Association.[30] Its only revenue stream is donations, but Wikileaks is planning to add an auction model to sell early access to documents.[30] According to the Wau Holland Foundation, Wikileaks receives no money for personnel costs, only for hardware, travelling and bandwidth.[44] An article in TechEYE.net wrote 

As a charity accountable under German law, donations for Wikileaks can be made to the foundation. Funds are held in escrow and are given to Wikileaks after the whistleblower website files an application containing a statement with proof of payment. The foundation does not pay any sort of salary nor give any renumeration to Wikileaks’ personnel, corroborating the statement of the site’s German representative Daniel Schmitt on national television that all personnel works voluntarily, even its speakers.[44] …” 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks 

Julian Assange

“…Julian Paul Assange (English pronunciation: /əˈsɑːnʒ/; born 1971) is an Australian internet activist and journalist best known for his involvement with Wikileaks, a whistleblower website. Assange was a physics and mathematics student, a hacker and a computer programmer, before taking on his current role as spokesperson and editor in chief for Wikileaks. Assange has said that “you can’t publish a paper on physics without the full experimental data and results; that should be the standard in journalism”.[1]Julian Paul Assange (English pronunciation: /əˈsɑːnʒ/; born 1971) is an Australian internet activist and journalist best known for his involvement with Wikileaks, a whistleblower website. Assange was a physics and mathematics student, a hacker and a computer programmer, before taking on his current role as spokesperson and editor in chief for Wikileaks. Assange has said that “you can’t publish a paper on physics without the full experimental data and results; that should be the standard in journalism”.[1] 

Early lifeAssange was born in Townsville, Queensland in 1971.[2] Assange has said that his parents ran a touring theatre company, and that he was enrolled in 37 schools and six universities in Australia over the course of his early life.[3] During his childhood years, he lived on the run with mother and half-brother. They were avoiding his half-brother’s father who was believed to belong to a cult led by Anne Hamilton-Byrne.[2] 

An article in The New Yorker has written that Assange was married to his girlfriend in an unofficial ceremony at the age of 18 and had a son.[2] The article says she left him while he was being investigated by the Australian Federal Police for hacking, and took their son.[2] 

Assange helped to write the 1997 book Underground: Tales of Hacking, Madness and Obsession on the Electronic Frontier which credits him as researcher.[4] It draws from his teenage experiences as a member of a hacker group named “International Subversives”, which involved a 1991 raid of his Melbourne home by the Australian Federal Police.[5][6] Wired, The Sydney Morning Herald, and The Sunday Times have pointed out that there exist similarities between Assange and the person called “Mendax” in the book.[7][8][9] The New Yorker has identified Assange as Mendax and explains its origin from a phrase of Horace. Assange was reported to have accessed various computers (belonging to an Australian university, a telecommunications company, and other organizations) via modem[10] to test their security flaws; he later pleaded guilty to 24 charges of hacking and was released on bond for good conduct after being fined AU$2100.[5][6][8] 

According to the Personal Democracy Forum, Assange founded a civil rights group for children called “Pickup”.[11] 

 Computer programming

After the hacking trial, Assange lived in Melbourne as a programmer and a developer of free software.[8] 

In 1995, Assange wrote Strobe, the first free and open source port scanner.[12][13] Strobe inspired Fyodor to develop the Nmap port scanner.[14] 

Starting around 1997, Assange co-invented “Rubberhose deniable encryption”, a cryptographic concept made into a software package for Linux designed to provide plausible deniability against rubber-hose cryptanalysis,[15] which he originally intended “as a tool for human rights workers who needed to protect sensitive data in the field”.[16] 

Other free software that Assange has authored or co-authored includes the Usenet caching software NNTPCache[17] and Surfraw, a command line interface for web-based search engines. 

University studies and travel

Assange studied physics and mathematics at the University of Melbourne until 2006, when he began to focus heavily on Wikileaks.[2] He has been described as being largely self-taught and widely read on science and mathematics.[8] He has also studied philosophy and neuroscience.[11] On his personal web page Assange described how he represented his University at the Australian National Physics Competition around 2005.[18] 

Assange has said that it is “pretty much true” that he is constantly on the move, and that he is “living in airports these days”.[2][19] Assange has lived for periods in Australia, Kenya and Tanzania, and has visited many other places including Vietnam, Sweden, Iceland, Siberia, Belgium and the United States.[2][19][20][21][22] Assange began renting a house in Iceland on March 30, 2010, from which he and other activists, including Birgitta Jónsdóttir, worked on the collateral murder video.[2] In May 2010 upon landing in Australia, his passport was taken from him, and when it was returned he was told that his passport was to be cancelled. The Australian Customs Service stated that such confiscation was only because his passport was worn, and that Assange was otherwise free to travel.[23][24] 

In 1999, Assange registered the website, Leaks.org; “but”, he says, “then I didn’t do anything with it”.[21] 

WikiLeaks

Wikileaks was founded in 2006.[2][19] Assange now sits on its nine-member advisory board,[25] and is a prominent media spokesman on its behalf. While newspapers have described him as a “director”[26] or “founder”[5] of Wikileaks, Assange has said “I don’t call myself a founder”,[27] but he does describe himself as the editor in chief of Wikileaks,[28] and has stated that he has the final decision in the process of vetting documents submitted to the site.[6] Like all others working for the site, Assange is an unpaid volunteer.[27] 

Assange was the winner of the 2009 Amnesty International Media Award (New Media),[29] awarded for exposing extrajudicial assassinations in Kenya with the investigation The Cry of Blood – Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances.[30] 

 
Julian Assange at New Media Days ’09 in Copenhagen

In accepting the Amnesty International Media Award 2009, Mr. Assange stated: 

It is a reflection of the courage and strength of Kenyan civil society that this injustice was documented. Through the tremendous work of organizations such as the Oscar foundation, the KNHCR, Mars Group Kenya and others we had the primary support we needed to expose these murders to the world. I know that they will not rest, and we will not rest, until justice is done.
“WikiLeaks wins Amnesty International 2009 Media Award for exposing Extra judicial killings in Kenya”.[31]

He has also won the 2008 Economist Index on Censorship Award; and various other media awards.[32] 

Assange says that Wikileaks has released more classified documents than the rest of the world press combined: 

That’s not something I say as a way of saying how successful we are – rather, that shows you the parlous state of the rest of the media. How is it that a team of five people has managed to release to the public more suppressed information, at that level, than the rest of the world press combined? It’s disgraceful.[19]

No real bombshells in Wikileak Afghan docs

Rick Moran

“…As for the question of should they have been published? Of course not. Anyone who gave that anti-American nutcase Julian Assange – an Australian by birth – access to those documents should be arrested, tried, convicted, and sent to jail for a very long time. Untold damage is being done simply because no one knows what use of this information will be made by the enemy. What intelligence can they glean from its contents? Certainly the Taliban can figure out some of our weaknesses by reading through these documents. For that reason alone, Assange himself should be relentlessly pursued and arrested. It is highly likely that this irresponsible release will result in additional American casualties. 

A related point to this release of documents is the way in which the government classifies information. You don’t have to be a free speech extremist to look in askance at much of what the government considers “classified.” Millions of documents every year are hidden away – some of them for no other reason than they would be politically damaging to someone. There have been bills in Congress introduced to set up committees or boards to review many documents from agencies not related to national security who get the “classified” designation but nothing has come of such proposals as yet. 

However, this is not the time for any such debate. The New York Times and the other media outlets who published this material will get away with it because of our expansive freedom of the press traditions and laws. Even their claim that they withheld some documents because, in their opinion, they were too sensitive is ridiculous. Who are they to make that determination? The bottom line is that laws were broken in handing these documents to an irresponsible source who also broke the law in giving them to the press.
…” 

 

  

 

  

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

« Previous Entries

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...