Standing For Freedom Against Big Government

February 28, 2010 · Posted in Philosophy · Comment

Market Prices – Purpose vs. Arbitrariness

February 27, 2010 · Posted in General Economics · Comment

Pursuit of Happiness

Society is a system of people connected via mutually inflicted actions. Individuals always feel uneasy about things in their lives at any specific moment. Uneasiness about one state of affairs makes us act in order to exchange it for a different one. If we felt no uneasiness at all we would at once cease all action. The removal of uneasiness is synonymous to what’s behind the term ‘pursuit of happiness’.

Purposeful Action

Mutual voluntary exchange is but one way of removing uneasiness for both parties involved. The fact that one person desires to consume certain goods or services, be it material goods, services, spiritual inspiration, or other things, is what gives another person purpose. But that other person also has demands that he needs fulfilled. This is what also gives the former person purpose. If something that one person has to offer meets the demands of another and vice versa then both are fulfilling a purpose in the process.

The place where mutual voluntary demands meet is by definition the market. Subjective and unknown value preferences find objective expression in the form of visible actions and ultimately in the form of prices. Where money is used in exchange, money prices emerge.

These prices give individuals indication as to what purposes they can fulfill out in the world. Wherever individuals aspire to meet such demands their action can be viewed as purposeful action.

Money prices are the main drivers of purposeful action. Wherever freely acting people sway from the path of fulfilling a purpose they are reminded of it in the form of price indicators on the market, and have the opportunity to get back on track.

Arbitrary Action

Wherever acts of aggression replace voluntary action, prices cease to exist or matter. Without prices it is impossible to perform purposeful acts on a large scale and on a sustainable basis.

Uncalled for action that does not even attempt to meet any demands, yet demands a remuneration in exchange, is the exact opposite of purposeful action. This is what we refer to as arbitrary action.

Theft is the ultimate arbitrary act. It is the act of taking one’s property for nothing in exchange. All action that results from this theft will continue to have arbitrary character.

Arbitrariness and Government

Arbitrary action is as the root of all governmental activities. The government perpetrates theft on its citizens under the pretense of providing something in exchange. Hence they hire workers and contractors to do things that can be presented to the public as that which they get in exchange. The fact that most of it goes into the coffers of individuals to spend it for personal pleasures at their whim is of course conveniently overlooked.

But all those actions they do perform are always arbitrary. We all know this, at least subconsciously. When people support a governmental program they are in their heart of hearts well aware that they have no idea what is really behind it. They don’t know if they will get what they asked for. It is the fact that they feel warm and fuzzy around other people regurgitating the same ideas that makes them go along. It is the hope for salvation rather than the knowledge about it. It is thus, in itself, also an arbitrary act.

Popularity of Arbitrary vs. Purposeful Action

To find purpose in life can be, at times, a strenuous and annoying undertaking. It is by many perceived as the subordination of one’s own desires to others’ whims. Those who act purposefully and succeed are by many scorned as cold and calculating individuals. Yet, at the same time, those who scorn them do feel the deepest respect for these accomplishments and really only live out their anger at the fact that they themselves did not achieve the same success. This is also the reason why many individuals lack respect for prices. Prices are always too high if you are a consumer and too low if you are a producer/worker. But we are all sometimes consumers, sometimes producers. Prices are a scientific fact of reality, not some arbitrary measure, they are the ultimate manifestation of purpose.

The reason why arbitrary action on a grand scale is so popular with the majority is that it introduces the perceived opportunity of acting without meeting anybody’s demands, of living out one’s fantasy’s of what should be done and how in this world with no constraints whatsoever. When someone cheers on a politician’s plan he always does so with the implicit assumption that this plan is actually his own plan. He blithely ignores the fact that millions of other people are projecting the same desires upon that same person.

To look over the fact that all actions performed by that politician will be carried out on one’s own shoulders with extorted money thus becomes a psychological necessity. For how could those acts be justified otherwise? Thus one has to go through the mind bending self-violation of morphing the ultimate arbitrary act of taxation into a purposeful and moral necessity of life.

If we cannot accept the most natural and basic element of the science of economics, we will inevitably come to flawed conclusions.

To wish to hamper with market prices by the means of aggression would be equivalent to aspiring to abolish gravity in the realm of physics.

In order to truly pursue happiness one has to find purpose in life rather than arbitrary fantasies. Only a rejection of arbitrary action can lead people there. In the sphere of economics, this means that the respect for market prices should be the primordial maxim of all economic analyses and opinions.

Tags: arbitrariness, money prices, prices, purpose

No Government??

February 24, 2010 · Posted in Government · Comment

OK, all you freedom worshiping nutjobs, all you anarchists, anarcho-capitalists, anti-staters, you who run around with mohawks and ripped pants, I really need to tell you: I agree that something is wrong with this government, but to pose as a solution to GET RID OF IT?? Are you completely out of your minds?? Obviously you never read anything about economics or ethics. Without government can you imagine the madness that would unravel immediately? The nation would plunge into a state of mass mutual warfare, the rule of law would disappear, trade would get crippled and we would all be yearning for an apparatus that keeps together the fabric of society … the government.

OK, I will stop that rant right here. This is pretty much the nonsense most of us here are familiar with. It is what we get every time we confront someone with the idea of a stateless society.

The problem is of course as we all know that when we propose the idea of a stateless society, THEY think we want to get rid of the functions that the state fulfills in their minds, while WE think of nothing but abolishing an apparatus that subsists solely by the means of aggression.

This of course really means that both sides have a very different definition of the term state. They have the fantasy high level conceptual definition, we have the one that simply looks at reality.

With those two opposing definitions it is obviously impossible to gain common ground.

I recently talked about it with a friend who is, I would say, a classic liberal, and a soon to be convert-anarchist (*evil laugh*). The following was conceptually the gist of the dialog:

He said: “I agree that something is wrong with the current way the government produces justice.”

I told him: “Well, I just think that the service of justice should not be provided by an institution that obtains its resources by the means of aggression, it should be voluntarily provided by DROs who compete for consumers.” (of course I explained him a bit more about DROs)

He said: “Well, then THAT’S your government, whether you want to call it DRO or whatever, it is a government. See, we NEED a government.”

Obviously he is wrong when we apply our commonly understood definition of government. But if we apply a statist’s definition of government, such as “That institution that produces justice.” he is actually very much correct.

Thus I would like to suggest that our Anarcho-Capitalistic position is actually not all that different from moderate statists’ positions. By saying we want to get rid of the state we will always and everywhere meet resistance and ridicule. As crazy as it sounds in our definition, we do indeed just want a DIFFERENT government from their point of view if we work with their shallow definition of government.

Thus I think we shouldn’t put the “abolish government” banner at the front lines of our march, but rather try to keep in mind what definitions most people are working with …

Example: I have had more people agreeing with me when I told them things like “yes we need roads and police, but how about we let the people in charge raise the funds for these efforts voluntarily from those they are serving, and allow other people to try and provide these services in a better way to bring more customers on their side”.

What I said above is 100% anarcho-capitalistic, however it will be a lot more agreeable to deluded and misguided statists. I’m not saying it will be absolutely agreeable right away, but certainly a lot more than to open with the idea that you want to get rid of the state …

Tags: anarchism, anarcho capitalism, Government

Ron Paul & Libertarians Own CPAC 2010

February 22, 2010 · Posted in Politics · Comment

Ron Paul’s speech at CPAC:

They also had the traditional CPAC straw poll, Ron Paul won this poll by a landslide. Here is what the annoyed, confused, and biased as ever news media had to say about this:

New York Times:

Mr. Paul, a Republican Congressman from Texas who inspired an intense following for president in 2008, swept the 2012 presidential straw poll Saturday at the Conservative Political Action Conference.

He won with 31 percent of the nearly 2,400 votes at the conference, edging out Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, who won the straw poll last year and who captured 22 percent of the vote.

When Mr. Paul’s name was announced in the packed ballroom of a Washington hotel, it elicited hoots and boos along with applause. Although Mr. Romney won fewer votes, he seemed to draw stronger applause.

Huffington Post

…In many respects, his win in the CPAC poll seemed pre-ordained — his band of followers having a well-earned reputation for flooding polls and forums like these.

What it portends for a possible 2012 presidential run is anyone’s guess. Paul had a similar cult-like following during the 2008 election, only to garner a relatively small chunk of the actual vote.

Politico:

Paul’s victory renders a straw poll that was already lightly contested among the likely 2012 GOP hopefuls all but irrelevant, as the 74-year-old Texan is unlikely to be a serious contender for his party’s nomination.

As the results were displayed on twin large screens in the ballroom — and even before Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio could announce who had won — a cascade of boos came down from a crowd that views Paul and his fervent supporters as irritants. Paul’s backers responded with cheers, though, when their candidate was then proclaimed by Fabrizio as the winner.

CPAC organizers were plainly embarrassed by the results, which could reduce the perceived impact of a contest that was once thought to offer a window into which White House hopefuls were favored by movement conservatives.

Out of all these pointless and useless “reports” Politico is really the funniest one. “Because the straw poll results don’t fit our understanding of things, we declare them irrelevant.” Wow, that’s what I call analytic, investigative, and unbiased journalism right there.

Luckily Politico didn’t hesitate to set the record straight, by posting a poll on their website on who SHOULD have won the CPAC 2010 straw poll, the results:

Ugh, these strange people, with their unfathomable superpowers of flooding forums and polls, damn you Paulites!!!

On a side note, I really enjoyed how Ryan Sorba’s arrogant and patronizing gay bashing nonsense was simply booed off the stage:

Some more interesting reports from fellow freedom fighter Pete Eyre:

Without a doubt the most-informative and principled session I attended was “You’ve Been Lied To: Why Real Conservatives Are Against the ‘War on Terror’” sponsored by C4L and LOLA, essentially calling out the pro-war conservatives on their own turf. The panelists included FFF founder and head Jacob Hornberger, retired Air Force Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, former CIA counter-terrorism specialist Philip Giraldi and former deputy attorney general Bruce Fein. Check out the speech as a playlist on FFF’s YouTube Channel on as a two-parter on their Vimeo Channel.

CPAC 2010: “Why Real Conservatives Are Against the War on Terrorism, Part 2″ from The Future of Freedom Foundation on Vimeo.

In the session my man Pericles Niarchos (a student at Drexel involved with the badass Student Liberty Front) asked the panelists whether they believe the Constitution they advocate a return to actually helped cause the American Empire they so vilify since it allows for the monopolization of the use of force. See his question and the responses by the panelists here at 46:10. Similarly, in the “How Many Crimes Have You Committed Today” session, in which self-described conservatives argued for lessening the number of actions that were federal offenses, I asked the panelists why, being advocates of free markets and less government, would they allow such an admittedly important good as law enforcement to be controlled by an institution sheltered from competition. Their response? That government needs to exists and that different levels of government should be responsible for different things blah blah blah.

When will minarchists finally realize that we arrived at the rights-violating oppressive welfare/warfare state we have today thanks to the belief that a third party should be granted a monopoly on violence?

… they will realize it when the time has come for them to realize it. When the truth can no longer be obscured, violated, bent, perverted, and covered up. When will that be? It will be someday, nobody knows when, nor does it really matter.

What matters is that we all take part in this great journey and educate as many people as we possibly can along the way. For when the time comes, people will be looking back to us pioneers who stared the beast right in the eyes, who took ridicule, ostracism, oppression, bigotry, and bullying with a smile, who stood for reason and integrity in an ocean of nonsense and corruption, and who never wavered on the path toward morality, truth, peace, and liberty for all.

Tags: cpac, cpac 2010, ron paul

Joseph Stack Suicide Manifesto

February 20, 2010 · Posted in Government · 4 Comments

This is the note left by the person who recently crashed a plane into the IRS building in Austin, TX:

Federal authorities are investigating the following Web posting linked to Joseph Stack, the pilot of the single-engine plane that crashed into an Austin, Texas, office building that housed IRS offices.

If you’re reading this, you’re no doubt asking yourself, “Why did this have to happen?” The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time. The writing process, started many months ago, was intended to be therapy in the face of the looming realization that there isn’t enough therapy in the world that can fix what is really broken. Needless to say, this rant could fill volumes with example after example if I would let it. I find the process of writing it frustrating, tedious, and probably pointless. especially given my gross inability to gracefully articulate my thoughts in light of the storm raging in my head. Exactly what is therapeutic about that I’m not sure, but desperate times call for desperate measures.

We are all taught as children that without laws there would be no society, only anarchy. Sadly, starting at early ages we in this country have been brainwashed to believe that, in return for our dedication and service, our government stands for justice for all. We are further brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place, and that we should be ready to lay our lives down for the noble principals represented by its founding fathers. Remember? One of these was “no taxation without representation”. I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood. These days anyone who really stands up for that principal is promptly labeled a “crackpot”, traitor and worse.

While very few working people would say they haven’t had their fair share of taxes (as can I), in my lifetime I can say with a great degree of certainty that there has never been a politician cast a vote on any matter with the likes of me or my interests in mind. Nor, for that matter, are they the least bit interested in me or anything I have to say.

Why is it that a handful of thugs and plunderers can commit unthinkable atrocities (and in the case of the GM executives, for scores of years) and when it’s time for their gravy train to crash under the weight of their gluttony and overwhelming stupidity, the force of the full federal government has no difficulty coming to their aid within days if not hours? Yet at the same time, the joke we call the American medical system, including the drug and insurance companies, are murdering tens of thousands of people a year and stealing from the corpses and victims they cripple, and this country’s leaders don’t see this as important as bailing out a few of their vile, rich cronies. Yet, the political “representatives” (thieves, liars, and self-serving scumbags is far more accurate) have endless time to sit around for year after year and debate the state of the “terrible health care problem”. It’s clear they see no crisis as long as the dead people don’t get in the way of their corporate profits rolling in.

And justice? You’ve got to be kidding!

How can any rational individual explain that white elephant conundrum in the middle of our tax system and, indeed, our entire legal system? Here we have a system that is, by far, too complicated for the brightest of the master scholars to understand. Yet, it mercilessly “holds accountable” its victims, claiming that they’re responsible for fully complying with laws not even the experts understand. The law “requires” a signature on the bottom of a tax filing; yet no one can say truthfully that they understand what they are signing; if that’s not “duress” than what is. If this is not the measure of a totalitarian regime, nothing is.

How did I get here?

My introduction to the real American nightmare starts back in the early ’80s. Unfortunately after more than 16 years of school, somewhere along the line I picked up the absurd, pompous notion that I could read and understand plain English. Some friends introduced me to a group of people who were having ‘tax code’ readings and discussions. In particular, zeroed in on a section relating to the wonderful “exemptions” that make institutions like the vulgar, corrupt Catholic Church so incredibly wealthy. We carefully studied the law (with the help of some of the “best”, high-paid, experienced tax lawyers in the business), and then began to do exactly what the “big boys” were doing (except that we weren’t steeling from our congregation or lying to the government about our massive profits in the name of God). We took a great deal of care to make it all visible, following all of the rules, exactly the way the law said it was to be done.

The intent of this exercise and our efforts was to bring about a much-needed re-evaluation of the laws that allow the monsters of organized religion to make such a mockery of people who earn an honest living. However, this is where I learned that there are two “interpretations” for every law; one for the very rich, and one for the rest of us. Oh, and the monsters are the very ones making and enforcing the laws; the inquisition is still alive and well today in this country.

That little lesson in patriotism cost me $40,000+, 10 years of my life, and set my retirement plans back to 0. It made me realize for the first time that I live in a country with an ideology that is based on a total and complete lie. It also made me realize, not only how naive I had been, but also the incredible stupidity of the American public; that they buy, hook, line, and sinker, the crap about their “freedom”. and that they continue to do so with eyes closed in the face of overwhelming evidence and all that keeps happening in front of them.

Before even having to make a shaky recovery from the sting of the first lesson on what justice really means in this country (around 1984 after making my way through engineering school and still another five years of “paying my dues”), I felt I finally had to take a chance of launching my dream of becoming an independent engineer.

On the subjects of engineers and dreams of independence, I should digress somewhat to say that I’m sure that I inherited the fascination for creative problem solving from my father. I realized this at a very young age.

The significance of independence, however, came much later during my early years of college; at the age of 18 or 19 when I was living on my own as student in an apartment in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. My neighbor was an elderly retired woman (80+ seemed ancient to me at that age) who was the widowed wife of a retired steel worker. Her husband had worked all his life in the steel mills of central Pennsylvania with promises from big business and the union that, for his 30 years of service, he would have a pension and medical care to look forward to in his retirement. Instead he was one of the thousands who got nothing because the incompetent mill management and corrupt union (not to mention the government) raided their pension funds and stole their retirement. All she had was social security to live on.

In retrospect, the situation was laughable because here I was living on peanut butter and bread (or Ritz crackers when I could afford to splurge) for months at a time. When I got to know this poor figure and heard her story I felt worse for her plight than for my own (I, after all, I thought I had everything to in front of me). I was genuinely appalled at one point, as we exchanged stories and commiserated with each other over our situations, when she in her grandmotherly fashion tried to convince me that I would be “healthier” eating cat food (like her) rather than trying to get all my substance from peanut butter and bread. I couldn’t quite go there, but the impression was made. I decided that I didn’t trust big business to take care of me, and that I would take responsibility for my own future and myself.

Return to the early ’80s, and here I was off to a terrifying start as a ‘wet-behind-the-ears’ contract software engineer. and two years later, thanks to the fine backroom, midnight effort by the sleazy executives of Arthur Andersen (the very same folks who later brought us Enron and other such calamities) and an equally sleazy New York Senator (Patrick Moynihan), we saw the passage of 1986 tax reform act with its section 1706.

For you who are unfamiliar, here is the core text of the IRS Section 1706, defining the treatment of workers (such as contract engineers) for tax purposes. Visit this link for a conference committee report (http://www.synergistech.com/1706.shtml#ConferenceCommitteeReport) regarding the intended interpretation of Section 1706 and the relevant parts of Section 530, as amended. For information on how these laws affect technical services workers and their clients, read our discussion here (http://www.synergistech.com/ic-taxlaw.shtml).

SEC. 1706. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.

(a) IN GENERAL – Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:

(d) EXCEPTION. – This section shall not apply in the case of an individual who pursuant to an arrangement between the taxpayer and another person, provides services for such other person as an engineer, designer, drafter, computer programmer, systems analyst, or other similarly skilled worker engaged in a similar line of work.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. – The amendment made by this section shall apply to remuneration paid and services rendered after December 31, 1986.

Note:

Â· “another person” is the client in the traditional job-shop relationship.

Â· “taxpayer” is the recruiter, broker, agency, or job shop.

Â· “individual”, “employee”, or “worker” is you.

Admittedly, you need to read the treatment to understand what it is saying but it’s not very complicated. The bottom line is that they may as well have put my name right in the text of section (d). Moreover, they could only have been more blunt if they would have came out and directly declared me a criminal and non-citizen slave. Twenty years later, I still can’t believe my eyes.

During 1987, I spent close to $5000 of my ‘pocket change’, and at least 1000 hours of my time writing, printing, and mailing to any senator, congressman, governor, or slug that might listen; none did, and they universally treated me as if I was wasting their time. I spent countless hours on the L.A. freeways driving to meetings and any and all of the disorganized professional groups who were attempting to mount a campaign against this atrocity. This, only to discover that our efforts were being easily derailed by a few moles from the brokers who were just beginning to enjoy the windfall from the new declaration of their “freedom”. Oh, and don’t forget, for all of the time I was spending on this, I was loosing income that I couldn’t bill clients.

After months of struggling it had clearly gotten to be a futile exercise. The best we could get for all of our trouble is a pronouncement from an IRS mouthpiece that they weren’t going to enforce that provision (read harass engineers and scientists). This immediately proved to be a lie, and the mere existence of the regulation began to have its impact on my bottom line; this, of course, was the intended effect.

Again, rewind my retirement plans back to 0 and shift them into idle. If I had any sense, I clearly should have left abandoned engineering and never looked back.

Instead I got busy working 100-hour workweeks. Then came the L.A. depression of the early 1990s. Our leaders decided that they didn’t need the all of those extra Air Force bases they had in Southern California, so they were closed; just like that. The result was economic devastation in the region that rivaled the widely publicized Texas S&L fiasco. However, because the government caused it, no one gave a shit about all of the young families who lost their homes or street after street of boarded up houses abandoned to the wealthy loan companies who received government funds to “shore up” their windfall. Again, I lost my retirement.

Years later, after weathering a divorce and the constant struggle trying to build some momentum with my business, I find myself once again beginning to finally pick up some speed. Then came the .COM bust and the 911 nightmare. Our leaders decided that all aircraft were grounded for what seemed like an eternity; and long after that, ’special’ facilities like San Francisco were on security alert for months. This made access to my customers prohibitively expensive. Ironically, after what they had done the Government came to the aid of the airlines with billions of our tax dollars . as usual they left me to rot and die while they bailed out their rich, incompetent cronies WITH MY MONEY! After these events, there went my business but not quite yet all of my retirement and savings.

By this time, I’m thinking that it might be good for a change. Bye to California, I’ll try Austin for a while. So I moved, only to find out that this is a place with a highly inflated sense of self-importance and where damn little real engineering work is done. I’ve never experienced such a hard time finding work. The rates are 1/3 of what I was earning before the crash, because pay rates here are fixed by the three or four large companies in the area who are in collusion to drive down prices and wages. and this happens because the justice department is all on the take and doesn’t give a fuck about serving anyone or anything but themselves and their rich buddies.

To survive, I was forced to cannibalize my savings and retirement, the last of which was a small IRA. This came in a year with mammoth expenses and not a single dollar of income. I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn’t have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed. But they didn’t notify me in time for me to launch a legal objection so when I attempted to get a protest filed with the court I was told I was no longer entitled to due process because the time to file ran out. Bend over for another $10,000 helping of justice.

So now we come to the present. After my experience with the CPA world, following the business crash I swore that I’d never enter another accountant’s office again. But here I am with a new marriage and a boatload of undocumented income, not to mention an expensive new business asset, a piano, which I had no idea how to handle. After considerable thought I decided that it would be irresponsible NOT to get professional help; a very big mistake.

When we received the forms back I was very optimistic that they were in order. I had taken all of the years information to Bill Ross, and he came back with results very similar to what I was expecting. Except that he had neglected to include the contents of Sheryl’s unreported income; $12,700 worth of it. To make matters worse, Ross knew all along this was missing and I didn’t have a clue until he pointed it out in the middle of the audit. By that time it had become brutally evident that he was representing himself and not me.

This left me stuck in the middle of this disaster trying to defend transactions that have no relationship to anything tax-related (at least the tax-related transactions were poorly documented). Things I never knew anything about and things my wife had no clue would ever matter to anyone. The end result is. well, just look around.

I remember reading about the stock market crash before the “great” depression and how there were wealthy bankers and businessmen jumping out of windows when they realized they screwed up and lost everything. Isn’t it ironic how far we’ve come in 60 years in this country that they now know how to fix that little economic problem; they just steal from the middle class (who doesn’t have any say in it, elections are a joke) to cover their asses and it’s “business-as-usual”. Now when the wealthy fuck up, the poor get to die for the mistakes. isn’t that a clever, tidy solution.

As government agencies go, the FAA is often justifiably referred to as a tombstone agency, though they are hardly alone. The recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies in their eight years certainly reinforced for all of us that this criticism rings equally true for all of the government. Nothing changes unless there is a body count (unless it is in the interest of the wealthy sows at the government trough). In a government full of hypocrites from top to bottom, life is as cheap as their lies and their self-serving laws.

I know I’m hardly the first one to decide I have had all I can stand. It has always been a myth that people have stopped dying for their freedom in this country, and it isn’t limited to the blacks, and poor immigrants. I know there have been countless before me and there are sure to be as many after. But I also know that by not adding my body to the count, I insure nothing will change. I choose to not keep looking over my shoulder at “big brother” while he strips my carcass, I choose not to ignore what is going on all around me, I choose not to pretend that business as usual won’t continue; I have just had enough.

I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt; it will take nothing less. I would only hope that by striking a nerve that stimulates the inevitable double standard, knee-jerk government reaction that results in more stupid draconian restrictions people wake up and begin to see the pompous political thugs and their mindless minions for what they are. Sadly, though I spent my entire life trying to believe it wasn’t so, but violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer. The cruel joke is that the really big chunks of shit at the top have known this all along and have been laughing, at and using this awareness against, fools like me all along.

I saw it written once that the definition of insanity is repeating the same process over and over and expecting the outcome to suddenly be different. I am finally ready to stop this insanity. Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.

The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.

Joe Stack (1956-2010)

I heard that the FBI removed it from several websites. This is unsurprising as the Federal government knows that something is cooking under the surface, and they feel like they are losing control.

Virtually every media outlet reporting on this will call Jo Stack an angry man, a lunatic, and what have you. They will do their best to avoid facts and paint him as a loony. You will know how (un)serious they take investigative and fact based, unbiased journalism when you read it.

Events like these are, as I pointed out before, the shape of things to come.

Tags: IRS, joseph stack, suicide

Commercial Real Estate Assessment By the COP

February 18, 2010 · Posted in General Economics · Comment

The inevitable commercial real estate crisis still looms, this time the COP chimes in:

The Congressional Oversight Panel today released its February oversight report, “Commercial Real Estate Losses and the Risk to Financial Stability.” The Panel is deeply concerned that a wave of commercial real estate loan losses over the next four years could jeopardize the stability of many banks, particularly community banks, and prolong an already painful recession.

Commercial real estate (CRE) loans made over the last decade – including retail properties, office space, industrial facilities, hotels and apartments – totaling $1.4 trillion will require refinancing in 2011 through 2014. Nearly half are at present “underwater,” meaning the borrower owes more on the loan than the underlying property is worth. While these problems have no single cause, the loans most likely to fail are those made at the height of the real estate bubble. The Panel notes, however, “Even borrowers who own profitable properties may be unable to refinance their loans as they face tightened underwriting standards, increased demands for additional investment by borrowers, and restricted credit.”

Community banks, unlike the largest Wall Street banks, face the greatest risk of insolvency due to mounting commercial real estate loan losses. According to federal guidelines, 2,988 banks nationwide are classified as having a “CRE Concentration.” None of these banks are among the 19 largest bank holding companies. Forecasts project that banks will suffer their worst losses well after the timeframe examined by the stress tests – an exercise conducted only on the nation’s 19 largest bank holding companies – and well after Treasury’s authority expires under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

The Panel found that “a significant wave of commercial mortgage defaults would trigger economic damage that could touch the lives of nearly every American.” When commercial properties fail, it creates a downward spiral of economic contraction: job losses; deteriorating store fronts, office buildings and apartments; and the failure of the banks serving those communities. Because community banks play a critical role in financing the small businesses that could help the American economy create new jobs, their widespread failure could disrupt local communities, undermine the economic recovery and extend an already painful recession.

The full report is available at cop.senate.gov.

Since we all have been talking about this inevitable and impending CRE bust, it seems kind of strange that the COP would issue such a report without specific intentions in mind. One can assume that this report along with others will be utilized in order to justify additional programs to provide corporate welfare to failing CRE projects in the form of additional bailout programs.

Tags: commercial real estate

The Bible Gone Wild – Kill the Blasphemers

February 13, 2010 · Posted in General Economics · 11 Comments

I thought I’d just put out there some of the stuff that those who believe that the Bible is God’s word would necessarily have to endorse, comments are, as always appreciated:

A Blasphemer Stoned
10 Now the son of an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father went out among the Israelites, and a fight broke out in the camp between him and an Israelite. 11 The son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the Name with a curse; so they brought him to Moses. (His mother’s name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri the Danite.) 12 They put him in custody until the will of the LORD should be made clear to them.

13 Then the LORD said to Moses: 14 “Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him. 15 Say to the Israelites: ‘If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; 16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.

Wow … God, that being supposedly perfect in wisdom and power, surely is a neurotic, insecure, and violent sociopath … at least if we give credence to this verse from that book called Bible.

Quite interesting how people can choose that same being as the ULTIMATE arbiter of righteousness and morality. I’m quite curious how this makes any sense.

I may remind anyone reading this: From a Christian’s point of view Jesus is God. So Jesus is that God that proclaimed that those who say things about him that aren’t very nice shall be STONED TO DEATH.

But, as always, I may be missing something here. So, all you devout Jesus freaks out there, fire away, tell me, what am I missing?

But, please, do stick to the verse I cited above, don’t try and deviate from it.

Tags: atheism, bible, bible gone wild, christianity, god

The Failing European Experiment – A Wakeup Call

February 11, 2010 · Posted in General Economics · Comment

The NYT writes Germany, Forced to Buoy Greece, Rues Euro Shift:

As Europe edges toward emergency guarantees to stem market panic over one of the most profligate members of the euro bloc, the country that the region turns to for leadership, Germany, is suffering from growing doubts about the European experiment it long championed.

Reluctant German leaders now find themselves forced to help Greece remain solvent, or risk watching markets attack one weak member after the next, from Portugal to Spain to Italy, threatening the stability of the euro, the European currency Germany fought so hard to create.

In a conference call with the finance ministers from the 16 countries that use the euro and the president of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, officials said that some action had to be taken to calm markets and take pressure off Greece. But what form that rescue would take — be it loans, loan guarantees or a promise to buy Greek government bonds — still had not been decided Wednesday night, ahead of a summit meeting involving all 27 European Union governments on Thursday.

What did appear clear was that Germany, with an assist from France, would have to take the lead. “The Germans are the only ones with deep pockets,” said Daniel Gros, director of the Center for European Policy Studies in Brussels. “If it was just Greece, they could consider letting them go down the drain, but it threatens the entire euro zone.”

Berlin has been mostly silent on the matter. That is partly to put pressure on Greece, as civil servants struck there Wednesday to oppose cutbacks that the government has promised in order to rein in its enormous budget deficit.

But a bailout will be politically awkward for Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government. It is precisely the financial millstone that opponents warned about when Germany gave up its treasured mark, a move that a majority of people here, in contrast to their political leaders, opposed at the time.

“If the German government would just transfer money to Greece, people in Germany would feel their worst fears had come true,” said Thomas Mayer, chief economist at Deutsche Bank.

The role of savior has been thrust upon Germany by default. The euro bloc has myriad rules and regulations intended to avoid the need for prosperous members to rush to the aid of those with weak economies.

But the markets have ignored the rules, fluctuating with unconfirmed reports that the Germans have agreed to rescue the Greeks, which often carry the implicit warning that everyone will suffer if they do not. As the largest European economy with the most fiscal flexibility, Germany is crucial to any euro zone effort to save Greece.

The apprehension in Germany runs much deeper than a single crisis. It comes in the same week that Germany gave up its most cherished title, world export champion, to China, heightening fears of a declining stature and importance globally.

Germany also faces a demographic challenge, managing a population that is not only graying but shrinking. Last month the government announced that the population dropped below 82 million last year for the first time since 1995. That means fewer people trying to pay off a growing national debt, with a projected budget deficit of $118 billion this year.

After Mrs. Merkel’s re-election in September and triumphant turn on the world stage in November for the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, her approval ratings have fallen to their lowest levels in more than three years. Criticism of her government over infighting in the governing coalition — mostly over tax cuts and the budget — has risen steadily. She has been noticeably reticent about the crisis in Greece, speaking out far more forcefully on populist issues like tracking down tax dodgers hiding money in Switzerland.

“It’s a conscious decision to keep quiet,” said Jakob von Weizsäcker, an economist at Bruegel, an economic policy research institute in Brussels, who used to work for the economics ministry in Berlin. “In reality, they are thinking about what they could do.”

The pressure was apparent in a harsh statement against the idea of a bailout issued Wednesday by the coalition partners in Mrs. Merkel’s government, the Free Democrats. There should be “no direct financial help for Greece,” the statement said. “It would send the absolutely wrong signal to other euro countries that no country has to strain to save any more.”

But even German opponents of the euro said a bailout appeared likely. Joachim Starbatty, a professor of economics at the University of Tübingen, was one of four professors who sued before the German Constitutional Court in 1998 to stop the formation of the currency union, which the court rejected as “obviously without foundation.”

Professor Starbatty said he believed that Germany would bow to pressure and back measures to protect Greece from market pressure. “Looking at it realistically, I think you’ll see some form of help that isn’t too damaging for the donor countries,” he said.

Peter Bofinger, professor of economics at the University of Würzburg and a member of the German government’s independent council of economic experts, said in its report that last November, the council recommended that the European Union could give guarantees for newly issued government bonds from a country in Greece’s predicament, if it had presented a workable plan for getting its finances in order.

After European governments helped stabilize financial institutions during the crisis, it was necessary to send a signal that they would not be allowed to break the currency union, Professor Bofinger said. “It’s important also for politicians to show, we will not allow you to rock our boat. We did so much to save you, you destroyed yourself almost, but we saved you.”

The truth is very simple: The best that can be done for the people of Greece is to not provide one cent of assistance to its corrupt, bloated, and union-controlled government apparatus. A country’s bailout is like a corporate bailout, only many times worse! From this logically follows that the absolute worst Europe could do to the people of Greece would be to give their rulers any more means to continue their irresponsible policies.

The European Currency Union and the European Union itself are both such gigantic failures that it is already pre-ordained that the entire experiment will go down in flames sooner or later. Now is certainly not that time yet. What we are seeing are just a few more cracks emerging in the structure of the system. The European bureaucrats will come up with some sort of pseudo solution to paper over and patch the Greek problem for now.

But the structural problems remain. Remember, this is not the first time a European country has abused the EU’s lucrative transfer system, and it surely won’t be the last! Portugal, Italy, and Spain are in very similar situations. Almost exactly 1 year ago we had the same debate going on. Back then I wrote:

Consider the European stability treaty dead. One member state after another will violate the requirements. The fact that a bailout of some Euro states by others is discussed, just shows how torn this European Union really is, how severe its imbalances are. With discrepancies like these, it is completely unfeasible to maintain a currency union. (…) Individual responsibility per member state rather than complete collectivism should be aspired. Unfortunately Europe has not been very keen on individual responsibility. In Germany, France, and Italy, all one can hear is rants about “neoliberalism”, “anarchism”, “capitalism on steroids” which supposedly are to blame for the financial crisis.

Even if the Greek government were saved to the detriment of the people it tyrannizes, this won’t be the last time we’ll be having this discussion, and it sure as hell won’t get any better!

Tags: europe, european union, germany, greece

The Truth About Haiti’s Plight

February 10, 2010 · Posted in Foreign Policy · Comment

… so if you are really concerned about curing Haiti’s suffering, don’t attend a benefit concert, don’t send more any foreign aid that will end up in the hands of corrupt people. Ask the right questions, oppose those policies that have been instrumental in bringing about Haiti’s plight! Support getting the US and other governments out of its way!!

Tags: earthquake, haiti

Total US Credit & Loans – January 2010

February 10, 2010 · Posted in General Economics · 1 Comment

Total credit and loans are, after a brief bump over the past two months, continuing their unstoppable contraction. Since October 2008 they have contracted by $1.3 trillion to now $15.6 trillion.

Deflation is still the name of the game, no matter how much the Fed and the government try to reflate the bubble.

Tags: total credit, total debt, total us credit