Tag Archives: economic bubble

Bail-Out Tinfoil, Web Bot Predictions and “I Know What I Saw”

Burning down the house?

Via Blacklisted News: Washington’s Blog:

Government leaders said that massive bailouts were necessary. Were they right?

Bullying Congress

The New York Times wrote on July 16th:

In retrospect, Congress felt bullied by Mr. Paulson last year. Many of them fervently believed they should not prop up the banks that had led us to this crisis — yet they were pushed by Mr. Paulson and Mr. Bernanke into passing the $700 billion TARP, which was then used to bail out those very banks.

In his latest trend forecast, Gerald Celente writes:

It was the familiar fear tactic — one that had worked in the past and would work again — an economic version of the Bush/Cheney argument for the Iraq War. The people were told that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and ties to Al Qaeda. If he wasn’t stopped, the next cloud would be a mushroom cloud.

The pretense was different but the game was the same: instill fear in a panicked public and they will follow their leader, regardless of how shallow the reasoning or how big the lie.

Just as the nation was hurried to war before it could be proven that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction or Al Qaeda ties, so too there was no time to debate what might happen if the “too big to fail” failed…

While the national pastime of “follow the leader” is always the path of least resistance, it comes at a high cost … financial ruin and/or war and death. In either case, when disaster strikes, the followers typically absolve themselves of any direct moral responsibility for both the outcome and for the role they played in allowing it to happen.

Celente is over-the-top, right? Tin foil hat time, right?

Well, maybe. But Congressmen Brad Sherman and Paul Kanjorski and Senator James Inhofe all say that the government warned of martial law if Tarp wasn’t passed:

[…]

Bait And Switch 

Indeed, the Tarp Inspector General has said that Paulson misrepresented some fundamental aspects of Tarp.

And Paulson himself has said:

During the two weeks that Congress considered the [Tarp] legislation, market conditions worsened considerably. It was clear to me by the time the bill was signed on October 3rd that we needed to act quickly and forcefully, and that purchasing troubled assets—our initial focus—would take time to implement and would not be sufficient given the severity of the problem. In consultation with the Federal Reserve, I determined that the most timely, effective step to improve credit market conditions was to strengthen bank balance sheets quickly through direct purchases of equity in banks.

So Paulson knew “by the time the bill was signed” that it wouldn’t be used for its advertised purpose – disposing of toxic assets – and would instead be used to give money directly to the big banks? But he didn’t tell Congress before they voted to approve the Tarp legislation? Does that mean that Paulson either actively misrepresented the purpose of the legislation or else committed a lie by omission – holding his tongue even though the fundamental idea behind his bill had changed?

It was a bait-and-switch, whether or not it was an intentional one.

The House Next Door

And while I have never heard of Obama and Bernanke’s “house next door” speeches before, Celente does a good job of describing them and then pulling the rug out from under their rationale:

Asked why taxpayers should be forced to foot the bill to bail out banks, brokerages, insurance companies and other institutions that had made bad bets, Mr. Obama responded, “You know, if my neighbor’s house is on fire, even if they were smoking
in the bedroom or leaving the stove on, right now my main incentive is to put out that fire so that it doesn’t spread to my house.”

When asked the same question seven months later, Ben Bernanke resorted to the same illegitimate analogy: “If you have a neighbor, who smokes in bed. And he’s a risk to everybody. If suppose he sets fire to his house, and you might say to yourself, ‘I’m not gonna call the fire department. Let his house burn down. It’s fine with me.’ But what if your house is made of wood? And it’s right next door to his house? What if the whole town is made of wood? Well, I think we’d all agree that the right thing to do is put out that fire first, and then say, ‘What punishment
is appropriate? How should we change the fire code? What needs to be done to make sure this doesn’t happen in the future? How can we fire proof our houses?’ That’s where we are now. We have a fire going on.”

Comparing a neighbor’s house on fire to spending trillions to bail out failed financial institutions is a totally fraudulent, puerile and transparent analogy … one that happened to be accepted without question by the entire media and foisted upon the public as the logic of the wise.

“Smoking in bed” and “the house on fire” bore no relationship to the reality. More to the point, what if your neighbor is a compulsive gambler who lost his fortune in Vegas and is now losing his house? Should the “whole town” be taxed for generations to come so that your neighbor is able to retain possession of his McMansion? And for his gross failures, should he be further rewarded with millions in “executive compensation” so he can travel first class back to Vegas to continue his wasteful, profligate ways?

Preventing the Next Fire

The bottom line is this. If the fire at the neighbor’s house was threatening your house, wouldn’t you want his matches taken away? Especially if he had lit fires that had burned down other houses in the past?

Unfortunately, as I have previously pointed out, Obama’s proposed economic regulations are like a law which makes arson illegal, but exempts convicted arsonists.

The top independent economists warn that the economy will not stabilize – and hundreds of billions or trillions of additional dollars will need to be thrown at the giant banks and financial companies – unless the fundamental problems are actually addressed and fixed. They agree that – to date – Obama, Summers, Geithner, Bernanke and the rest of the boys have not done so.

Indeed, I would argue that the government is actually handing out matches by encouraging the financial giants to hide the extent of their toxic assets (through funny accounting and the continued use of SIVs), restart the shadow banking system, re-lever up, and engage in new types of financial schemes such as securitization of life insurance policies.

As I wrote a year ago, by trying to put out the raging fires of deleveraging, the government was ensuring that they would grow and wipe out the whole forest.

And as former head BIS economist William White wrote recently, we have to resist the temptation to blow another bubble every time the economy gets in trouble:

Forest fires are judged to be nasty, especially when one’s own house or life is threatened, or when grave harm is being done to tourist attractions. The popular conviction that fires are an unqualified evil reached its zenith after a third of Yellowstone Park in the US was destroyed by fire in 1988. Nevertheless, conventional wisdom among forest managers remains that it is best to let natural forest fires burn themselves out, unless particularly dangerous conditions apply. Burning appears to be part of a natural process of forest rejuvenation. Moreover, intermittent fires burn away the undergrowth that might accumulate and make any eventual fire uncontrollable.

Perhaps modern macroeconomists could learn from the forest managers. For decades, successive economic downturns and even threats of downturns (“pre-emptive easing”) have been met with massive monetary and often fiscal stimuli…

Just as good forest management implies cutting away underbrush and selective tree-felling, we need to resist the ­credit-driven expansions that fuel asset bubbles and unsustainable spending patterns. Recent reports from a number of jurisdictions with well-developed financial markets seem to agree that regulatory instruments play an important role in leaning against such phenomena. What is less clear is that central bankers recognise that they might have an even more important role to play. In light of the recent surge in asset prices worldwide, this issue needs urgent attention. Yet another boom-bust cycle could have negative implications, social and political, stretching beyond the sphere of economics.

Whoever started the fire in the first place, and whether or not there was really a crisis which required bailouts the first time around, the fact is that the government is ensuring more – and – bigger fires in the future.

Government Leaders Said Bailouts Were Needed Because “The House Next Door” Was Burning Down…Were They Right?

Want to know what WebBot is?

Find out in this interview that Heinrick Palmgren has with its’ creator, Cliff High!

Cliff High – Web Bot and Predicting the Future

According to film maker James Fox, if Gary McKinnon had just waited until October 19th, 2009, he wouldn’t be in as must trouble as he is with the American Federal Empire:

Computer hacker Gary McKinnon could be
facing 70 years in prison for hacking into government UFO files. He should
have just waited until Monday, October 19th @ 9 p.m. ET/PT when investigative
filmmaker James Fox (of FCZ Media) provides answers on the UFO phenomenon in
his feature-length documentary I Know What I Saw airing exclusively on The
History Channel.  Fox assembled the most credible UFO witnesses from around
the world to testify at The National Press Club in Washington D.C.  For the
first time, Air Force Generals, astronauts, military and commercial pilots,
and government and FAA officials from seven countries speak out on national
television, providing shocking evidence that UFOs are real. 

Narrated by James Fox, I Know What I Saw traces sightings and reports
worldwide. Testimony includes high-ranking military personnel, pilots and
astronauts from France, England, Belgium, Chile, Peru, Iran and the United
States who all call on the U.S. Government to re-open its investigation into
UFOs – which the Air Force shut down over 30 years ago.

In I Know What I Saw, filmmaker James Fox uncovers new details of a UFO
landing at an American Air Force base in the UK.  U.S. Air Force Col. Charles
Halt recently admitted, “In December 1980 I was involved in a multi night
incident where a UFO landed, was touched, photographed and departed rapidly.
Two nights later, five or more intelligently controlled objects, assumed to be
extraterrestrial, returned to the area and were witnessed by numerous people.”
Air Force Sergeant, James Penniston, copied strange markings from the landed
UFO which filmmaker James Fox has analyzed by an expert symbologist for the
very first time. The results are startling.

Senator John McCain and Arizona Governor Fife Symington reveal their efforts
to investigate the infamous “Phoenix lights” sighting. “I believe that our
government should take an active role in investigating this very real
phenomenon,” said Symington, who was himself a witness to the reported mile
wide craft seen by thousands in Arizona while he was governor.

For more information about James Fox and I Know What I Saw go to
www.iknowwhatisawthemovie.com

I don’t how much truth was gleaned from Fox’s interviews, but interviewing the above listed people would go a long way toward some credibility in the study of UFOs.

But until the subject is studied under the same empirical scrutiny that SETI or others are given, all we have amounts the same as religious stygmata.

History Channel Airs Acclaimed UFO Documentary ‘I Know What I Saw,’ Directed By James Fox, On October 19

Interstellar ‘GPS’, Demonic UFOs and ‘Chinese’ Assets

An interstellar ‘GPS’ for future probes?

Pulsars have huge advantages. A deep space satellite network to fix position is a costly option — it doesn’t scale well as we expand deeper into the Solar System and beyond it. Autonomous navigation is clearly preferable, tying the navigation system to a natural reference frame like pulsars. The down side: Pulsar signals are quite weak and thus put demands upon spacecraft constrained by mass and power consumption concerns. So there’s no easy solution to this.

But several readers (thanks especially to Frank Smith and Adam Crowl) have pointed out a recent paper by Bartolome Coll (Observatoire de Paris) and Albert Tarantola (Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris) that speculates on a system based on four millisecond pulsars: 0751+1807 (3.5 ms), 2322+2057 (4.8 ms), 0711-6830 (5.5 ms) and 1518+0205B (7.9 ms). The origin of the space-time coordinates the authors use is defined as January 1, 2001 at the focal point of the Cambridge radiotelescope where pulsars were discovered in 1967. Thus, the paper continues:

…any other space-time event, on Earth, on the Moon, anywhere in the Solar system or in the solar systems in this part of the Galaxy, has its own coordinates attributed. With present-day technology, this locates any event with an accuracy of the order of 4 ns, i.e., of the order of one meter. This is not an extremely precise coordinate system, but it is extremely stable and has a great domain of validity.

If these numbers are correct, they represent quite a jump over the ESA study cited above, which worked out the minimal hardware requirements for a pulsar navigation system and arrived at a positioning accuracy of no better than 1000 kilometers. ESA is working within near-term hardware constraints and discusses ways of enhancing accuracy, but the report does point out the huge and perhaps prohibitive weight demands these solutions will make upon designers.

Weight demands might not be as much a concern as Paul and others speculate, if probe builders use the proposed nanotechnology previously written about on his site. And using Nature in all her glory isn’t so far-fetched as it seems!

Millisecond Pulsars For Starship Navigation 

…………………………………………..

Are UFOs and associated phenomena really supernatural angels and demons fighting over the immortal souls of human beings?

Dave Biedny and Gene Steinberg during this past Sunday’s Paracast (5/31/09) interviewed Christian UFO researcher L.A. Marzulli to find the answer to that question.

I don’t think Marzulli convinced them, but tune in and find out for yourselves!

Marzulli Interview – 5/31/09

…………………………………………….

Sir, can you spare $770 billion?

Mr Geithner is on his first official visit to China, the biggest foreign investor in US treasury bonds.

Ahead of meetings with President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao, he said the US and China must work together to fix the global economic system.

Mr Geithner said the US would move swiftly to get its debt under control.

In a speech at Beijing University at the start of his two-day visit, Mr Geithner reassured his Chinese hosts that they need not worry about the estimated $770bn (£475bn) they have invested in US treasuries, a class of US government debt.

“Chinese financial assets are very safe,” he said, drawing laughter from the audience.

Ha-hahaha, hehehehehe, hohohoho, it is to laugh!

Ask these folks how funny things are:

tentcity.60209

Tent Cities In America

Geithner Assures China Investors

Thanks to Piglipstick !

More 2009 Bilderberg Meeting Updates

From Bilderberg investigative journalist Daniel Estulin:

Investigative journalist Daniel Estulin, whose information from inside Bilderberg has routinely proven accurate, states that the global elite’s plan to completely destroy the economy and ultimately lower global population by two thirds has stoked fears even within Bilderberg itself that the fallout from such chaos could ultimately result in the globalists losing their control over the world.

In a telephone interview, Estulin re-iterated his original points about Bilderberg’s 2009 agenda, which were released in a pre-meeting booklet to members. These include the notion that investors, whipped up into a false state of euphoria by the belief that the economy is recovering, are being suckered into ploughing their money back into the system as a set up for “massive losses and searing financial pain in the months ahead” as the stock market reverses its uptrend and plummets to new lows.

One of Bilderberg’s main topics of conversation at this year’s meeting was whether to oversee a long period of economic stagnation or to quickly sink the economy with a rapid depression.

Estulin called the “bank stress tests” recently conducted as being “little more than a shameless hoax based on the irrational assumption that the economy wont get as bad as it already is.”

[…]

One of Bilderberg’s primary concerns according to Estulin is the danger that their zeal to reshape the world by engineering chaos in order to implement their long term agenda could cause the situation to spiral out of control and eventually lead to a scenario where Bilderberg and the global elite in general are overwhelmed by events and end up losing their control over the planet.

[…]

Estulin said that such a massive crisis would bring many unknowns that “Scare and frighten some of the more savvy members of the Bilderberg inner circle who are wondering how far they have actually gone not only to destroy the world but perhaps even destroy themselves,” adding that this subject was a topic of conversation at this year’s meeting.

I wondered how long this would go on before some of the more intelligent inbreds (I know, an oxymoron) figured out that continually bleeding the victim would cause death, and thus their own. Even the dumbest of predators know this.

Speaking of predators, here’s this year’s List . (Most of the list is in Greek, but some of the names are in English and easily recognisable.)

Bilderberg Fears Losing Control in Chaos Plagued World

Federal Reserve Bubble Bath; Updated

Eric Janzsen writes in the online February ’08 Harper’s Magazine:

Our economy is in serious trouble. Both the production-consumption sector and the FIRE sector know that a debt-deflation Armageddon is nigh, and both are praying for a timely miracle, a new bubble to keep the economy from slipping into a depression.

We have learned that the industry in any given bubble must support hundreds or thousands of separate firms financed by not billions but trillions of dollars in new securities that Wall Street will create and sell. Like housing in the late 1990s, this sector of the economy must already be formed and growing even as the previous bubble deflates. For those investing in that sector, legislation guaranteeing favorable tax treatment, along with other protections and advantages for investors, should already be in place or under review. Finally, the industry must be popular, its name on the lips of government policymakers and journalists. It should be familiar to those who watch television news or read newspapers.

There are a number of plausible candidates for the next bubble, but only a few meet all the criteria. Health care must expand to meet the needs of the aging baby boomers, but there is as yet no enabling government legislation to make way for a health-care bubble; the same holds true of the pharmaceutical industry, which could hyperinflate only if the Food and Drug Administration was gutted of its power. A second technology boom—under the rubric “Web 2.0”—is based on improvements to existing technology rather than any new discovery. The capital-intensive biotechnology industry will not inflate, as it requires too much specialized intelligence.

There is one industry that fits the bill: alternative energy, the development of more energy-efficient products, along with viable alternatives to oil, including wind, solar, and geothermal power, along with the use of nuclear energy to produce sustainable oil substitutes, such as liquefied hydrogen from water. Indeed, the next bubble is already being branded. Wired magazine, returning to its roots in boosterism, put ethanol on the cover of its October 2007 issue, advising its readers to forget oil; NBC had a “Green Week” in November 2007, with themed shows beating away at an ecological message and Al Gore making a guest appearance on the sitcom 30 Rock. Improbably, Gore threatens to become the poster boy for the new new new economy: he has joined the legendary venture-capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, which assisted at the births of Amazon.com and Google, to oversee the “climate change solutions group,” thus providing a massive dose of Nobel Prize–winning credibility that will be most useful when its first alternative-energy investments are taken public before a credulous mob. Other ventures—Lazard Capital Markets, Generation Investment Management, Nth Power, EnerTech Capital, and Battery Ventures—are funding an array of startups working on improvements to solar cells, to biofuels production, to batteries, to “energy management” software, and so on. (link)

Wow. My ol’ buddy Highwayman sure called this one right, especially about ‘favorable tax treatment’, meaning Wall Street firms will get the favorable part, not us:

Yep, the Canadian element of Gore/Suzuki Morons Inc. are yapping their fool heads off, once again, bleating the virtues of a “Carbon Tax” that supposedly will make big business pay for polluting the environment! But, you know who REALLY is going to pay, now, don’t you? US! Not big business, whom ‘Stupid Pants’ really worships, but the common people! (link)

Say what you want about The Highwayman, (in fact, he doesn’t care what anyone thinks of him, he loves a good fight!) he has studied the world bankers and financiers for almost thirty years, so he has a good feel for what they do to the world’s working poor and middle classes. Yes, he’s a Christian and people accuse him of being a ranting fundie at times, but he’s a friend and never hid who he is from anybody.

Unfortunately, this economic bubble and tax the poor scheme the Federal Reserve gangsters have imposed upon us since 1913 is the only game in town. As Janzsen notes in his essay; “Given the current state of our economy, the only thing worse than a new bubble would be its absence.

It gives the old tome ‘bubble, bubble, toil and trouble’ life like Frankenstein’s Monster! (Gawd, another cliche, somebody make me stop!)

Update: Interview of Investor Eric Janzsen in Wired Magazine; http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2008/03/cleantech_bubble