Showing posts with label banking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label banking. Show all posts

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Some Old Thoughts

In 1996 the Republican Party sent out a propaganda piece titled: Mandate for Leadership. I just found this while going through some files from an old computer. It was my response to the survey. I attached it to the form before returning it. My comments are just as valid today as they were 14 years ago.



MANDATE for REPRESENTATION


The following are my answers to the questions on the Republican National Committee’s survey, “Mandate for Leadership”:

1. Which of the following do you think is most important for Congress to do in 1996? (Lower taxes - Cut federal spending - Both)

The most important thing for Congress to do in 1996 is return the federal government to the bounds set by the Constitution. Do that, and reduced federal spending and lower taxes will follow.


2. Do you support Republican efforts to balance the federal budget by the year 2002? (Yes-No-Undecided)

Neither party has any intention of balancing the budget. The moneyed aristocracy of the New World Order would not permit it. Under the landed aristocracy of the old order, the serf was bound to the land. The American serf is bound to the national debt. Still, restore the Constitution and a balanced budget will follow. [I didn't say this at the time, but it is becoming obvious to more people that this applies to the serfs of all nations.]

3. Should this Congress try to simplify America’s tax code? (Yes-No-Undecided)

This is a joke--right? The tax code is complex by design. The idea has always been to create hidden “loopholes” so that those who benefit most from extravagant government spending can escape the crushing burden of taxes levied on the rest of us. “Tax Reform” usually comes when too many of us have learned of the “loopholes” and are using them. The code is then restructured to create new “loopholes” for the super-rich. Congress will not “simplify” the tax code.

4. Would you support abolishing the current tax rates and imposing a simple, flat tax rate, so that everyone pays the same percentage of taxes on their income?
(Yes-No-Undecided)

No one should be forced to pay someone else’s bill. Taxes should be apportioned according to benefit received. This means a “fee for service” concept of government wherever possible. A very low flat tax would probably be the fairest way to apportion the minimal cost of Constitutional government (see answer to question one) not covered by use fees. Of course, if taxation was based on a percentage of representation in Washington today, then the super- rich would pay one hundred percent of the taxes.

5. To create new jobs and protect current ones, should Congress focus primarily on policies to make the private sector economy grow, or should they try to create and fund new government jobs programs through higher taxes?
(Focus on private sector saving & investment policies-Create and fund new jobs programs-Other_____________________)

Government jobs are institutionalized unemployment. Once created they are unlikely to go away. They increase the burden on the productive (private) sector of the economy. This causes more unemployment and a “need” for more government “jobs”. The cycle continues until the economy collapses. Restore constitutional government. The Federal Reserve and the bulk of the Federal bureaucracy will be eliminated immediately. The giant corporations will gradually crumble under their own weight. Free enterprise will be restored. A free American people will restore the economy.

6. Do you believe our Social Security system is financially sound for future generations? (Yes-No-Undecided)

A pyramid scheme is a confidence game based on trickery and deceit. It can never be “financially sound” for its victims—present or future.

7. Of all the following issues, which do you think is the most important for Congress to achieve in 1996? (Lower taxes - Create new jobs - Repeal Social Security tax increase - Cut federal spending - Simplify tax code - Cut government regulation/red tape)

Restoring the Constitution is the most important thing Congress could do. All of the choices given in this question will naturally follow.

8. Do you want to see Bill Clinton defeated in 1996?
(Yes-No-Undecided)

Bill Clinton is a Rhodes scholar. Cecil Rhodes, the wealthy British Imperialist who established the scholarships, dreamed of the day America would police the world for the empire. At Oxford, Rhodes Scholars are indoctrinated in Fabian Socialism as a domestic policy and British Imperialism (euphemistically called “globalism”) as a foreign policy. Clinton and other Rhodes Scholars should be registered as agents of a foreign government. They should not be allowed to serve as President. The Tories have controlled America too long. British domestic policy has been our domestic policy. British foreign policy has been our foreign policy. Rhodes’ dream has become America’s nightmare.

We need an American in the White House. Someone who will stop the squandering of young American lives all over the world and of our wealth at home and abroad. We need someone who believes in true internationalism as expressed by George Washington — friendship to all and entangling alliances with none — and who will work with Congress (not over or around) to bring an end to the interventionism that now posses as internationalism.

Unfortunately, globalist Dole is no more qualified for that role than Clinton.

9. Will you support the RNC and its effort to send out this Mandate for Leadership Survey to thousands of taxpayers in the next 60 days.
(Yes-No-Undecided)

No American can support a Mandate for “Leadership”. The basic principle of American government is representation not “leadership”. The leadership principle (das Führerprinzip) was born in Nazi Germany and should have been buried with the Führer (the Leader). America was built on the premise that the people are better able to manage their own affairs than are a gaggle of bureaucrats and politicians. I’m wary of megalomaniacs who want to “lead” a whole nation. I’m wary of would be Führers. The people should be, too!


Return to TOC

Friday, October 29, 2010

PLEASE HELP!!!

It was never my intention to make money from this blog or to use it to solicit funds for any cause, but a crisis has arisen that makes it a humanitarian necessity.

On October 26, 2010 an article by Megan Murphy in the UK's Financial Times has revealed a heart-rending story of a devastating financial crisis that has hit a small segment of the world's population.

A Swiss bank, hit hard by the financial crisis, is trying to get the Swiss financial regulator, Finma, to drop a $1m cash bonus cap for its top bankers. The bank has received “complaints it has strained some executives’ personal finances.”


The bonuses are not limited to $1m, but remainders are to be paid in deferred cash and share awards. The bank wants the additional cash for “their top earners” says the Times.


According to one UBS banker, the limits are creating a hardship making it tough for the top earners to make their mortgage payments and keep their kids in [elite] schools. [Heaven forbid their kids have to go to public schools and rub shoulders with our kids.]


Murphy reports that other investment banks such as Credit Suisse, Barclays and Goldman Sachs, are having the same problems. To get around it some have increased base pay for these executives. The Times says, “A managing director at a global investment bank, for example, can now expect to earn a $500,000 salary before bonus, up from $200,000 to $250,000 before the crisis.”


It's very important that we be especially kind to that incredibly well dressed family that just moved in next to us in one of the many tent cities springing up all over the globe. They may have just had their villa on the Riviera foreclosed.


But just being kind may not be enough. I'm now soliciting funds to help bailout the bank executives. I'm asking everyone to send what they can up to regulatory limits*. Please send checks or money orders (no cash please) payable in Uzbekistanian Som. Make checks payable to “Save Our Bankers” and send to the West Bank of the Delaware. On behalf of S.O.B. and the S. O. B.'s we're helping, I thank you.


*International rules require a limit of 500 in whatever currency is used for private charitable donations to help out bankers. Please do not exceed the limit.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a3eded6c-e133-11df-90b7-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss&ftcamp=crm/email/20101026/nbe/AsiaMorningHeadlines/product

Return to TOC

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Government of Money, by Money, and for Money

Although it doesn’t fit any scheme of idealism, the fact is that government is the power of money. It is to the misfortune of all the peoples of the world that money is now global and seeks power on a global level to promote its interests. It’s unfortunate that the Anglo-American Empire is busying itself with the spreading of this global dominance of money in the name of “democracy." Use of American military power to do this fulfills Cecil Rhodes dream of the U.S. taking over Britain's self-appointed role of world policeman.

Discussing the subject of Southern Secession and the Draconian and very unconstitutional means Lincoln used to suppress it and showing that suppression to be money motivated, M A Johnson, an aol group member, posted this from Lysander Spooner in a group a number of years ago:

----------

Spooner also hits upon the true reason for Lincoln's war, namely, the need to keep money flowing into the federal treasury via enforcement of the protective tariff:

All political power, so called, rests practically upon this matter of money. Any number of scoundrels, having money enough to start with, can establish themselves as a "government"; because, with money, they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort more money; and also compel general obedience to their will. It is with government, as Caesar said it was in war, that money and soldiers mutually supported each other; that with money he could hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money. So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon money. With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money. And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money.

The love of money is the root of all evil. And it is omnipotent government which is best able to carry out the evil plans of those who love money.

-------

I would add to this that money need not always resort to soldiers. Buying “intellectuals" to cloak their crimes in garb of "reason" or “progress" can sometimes reduce the need for soldiers by quelling the masses through the narcotic effect of well developed though meaningless and fallacious rhetoric.


Back to TOC

Monday, February 8, 2010

Hen House Safe – Fox In Charge of Security


According to the UK's Financial Times, a “respected financial expert,” Peter Hancock, vice-chairman at KeyCorp, has been appointed executive vice-president in charge of, among other things, AIG's “risk.” According to Times reporter Francesco Guerrera, his new role will “position” him to succeed current CEO, Robert Benmosche. Benmosche is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Mr. Hancock is not on any of the lists I have. Can he fill Benmosche's spot at AIG without filling his spot on the CFR?

Certainly, the new “fox” has some experience in risk management. The Times credits him with being one of the inventors, while at JPMorgan, of the credit derivatives that played a dominant role in the current collapse. Mr. Hancock's lieutenants helped protect JPMorgan from the brunt of the collapse. Morgan even gained some advantage from the collapse reports the Times. What a surprise. Those with a suspicious nature might start thinking Morgan set the whole thing up. Personally, I get a distinct scent of the Savings & Loan fiasco that wiped out most of the commercial banks' competition. Anyone have the heart to tell George Bailey that it's not such a wonderful life here in the United Pottervilles of America?

Anyway, Mr. Hancock is apparently feeling remorse for the horrible financial mess into which he's put us and most of the world. He's practically working pro bono on this job. Those “familiar with the matter” says the Times, say he'll only receive a compensation package of up to $7.5 million. Reports are that Kenneth Feinberg, Obama's “pay tsar,” has signed off on the package.

At least with Morgan and Hancock doing so well, those who lost their life savings, their pensions, businesses, homes, and other livelihoods can feel some consolation in knowing not everyone is doing so badly.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0df37f30-142d-11df-8847-00144feab49a.html


Return To TOC