theobannion

Luckiest Generation in History: Young Americans

Dear Mr. Perry,

Your comparisons are so-o-o inspirational! I wish I were younger so that I could have many, many more years to enjoy the truly amazing prosperity our youth currently enjoy!

But I have to question your selection of products. For example, I'm not sure how many of your readers are aware that the Argus 21 was a Leica camera. Yup, the same famous (and very expensive) professional cameras being manufactured in Germany at the time. You should compare it to, for example, the Nikon D70, no longer top-of-the-line & no longer their cutting edge digital camera; you can pick one up from Amazon.com (refurbished, new ones are hard to come by) for only a smidge under $1000.00. Of course, that's without the lens.

I would also like to point out that in 1949 my parents were paying $43.00 a month for a four room apartment (still standing, thank you) on East 53 Street between First & Second Avenues in Manhattan. Your student could have lived there for 4.46 months. Not bad for such "impoverished" times! For a four room apartment in Midtown, consult your realtor. Today's student couldn't live there for more than three days.

I would also like to call you attention to a recent article in The New York Times: "...the Costa Trailer Court ... is an odd collection of narrow aluminum-clad residences packed tightly together that years ago became rooted to the ground. ... Home to almost 240 families who pay less than $650 a month rent for their patches of earth, they have survived for decades against New Jersey's tumultuous real estate market." [Need I point out that in a trailer park, you just rent the piece of ground on which your trailer sits? I'm sure that, after the many years you've spent living in trailer parks in your impoverished childhood (I'm sure you remember 1949 well), you already know this.] But isn't that a sweet deal? Just $650.00 per month plus the mortgage on the trailer!

Back to the Times: "But now their survival is in jeopardy. Officials in Lodi, a tired industrial town in search of a new identity, want to replace the weathered-looking 17-acre stretch of trailer parks with new stores that they say will generate more taxes. But for the cash-strapped residents of the two parks, nothing less than their way of life is at risk." And so on and so on. But I think you get the point.

Your article is a carefully crafted piece of propaganda, as are most of your contributions. The least important element in your writing seems to be the truth.

SOB.

GLD Adds 9.6 Tonnes: Watch Out, Switzerland!

Tim -

You seem to gloss over the point of whether the gold is really there. This point is critical. The managers of the trust need to change the ground rules so the gold can actually be inventoried - in ALL their warehouses.

Best,
SOB.

Rep. Barney Frank says he expects the SEC to restore the uptick rule in about a month. A SEC spokesman confirms the agency is taking up the issue.

Since we're into rule changes, how about changing the rule that disallows small investors (less than $25,000.00) from day-trading? And how about ditching the riduculous rule that gets a short-term trader labeled a "pattern day trader" if he closes in the same day 4 positions in a five day period - this gets him the privilege of NEVER AGAIN being able to close a position on the same day in which it was opened EVEN IF IT'S TO STOP OUT LOSSES! Did Cox have to supply cannon fodder for his rich friends?

Call me clueless, but this sounds pointless.

SOB.

Unemployment Could Cause a 'Phase Change' in Public Mood

Dear Tim,

It's refreshing to read someone who is reaching a wider audience than I am, and who is addressing readers with a modicum of intelligence and influence, who is willing to imply that real unemployment is much higher than the government's self-serving lies would indicate ("With unemployment now soaring past eight percent, on its way to perhaps ten percent, and with other measures of joblessness about double those figures..."). People do indeed drop out of the "labor force" when they outlive their unemployment compensation & are no longer reporting their status to a government bureaucrat. The denominator (labor force - "farce"?) drops a tad, but the numerator (the unemployed) drops a bunch: presto, lower unemployment rate!

The monthly household survey leaves out an army of unemployed workers who have been living in anything from tents off the NY Thruway (young mother with whom I worked at Barnes & Noble in Rockleigh), to abandoned buildings, to the family pickup truck (gentleman with whom I worked in Ridgewood). No household, no survey. Which brightens the results. But not for the homeless worker. Anyone who was old enough to be politically conscious during the Reagan years of 1984-speak will remember the wonderful job his administration did with the aid of the major media to convince us that "the homeless" were either psychotic or drunks or drugged out of their brains. After that admirable propaganda job, no one wanted to hear about homelessness. It was exactly at that time when I realized that the reality with which I was dealing on a daily basis was a far cry from what was being depicted by the media. That awoke me to the fact that Reagan's dream to make business (which obviously includes the media, which is a cash cow) and government partners had come to pass, & that the so-called "free press," in which I had believed till then, was nothing more than a government/business propaganda machine, perfectly happy to promote whatever lie was expedient to keep the "clown-citizens" believing in the tooth faery.

As for violence, I live in one of the poorest countries of Latin America, and here, it's mandatory that the middle class live behind gates and walls topped with barbed or electrified wire.

Best of luck with your column.

SOB.

In the late 'eighties, in Bergen County, NJ, one of the wealthiest counties in the country, there were more family homeless shelters than I can remember. The one in which I volunteered was a day-care center by day, located in what used to be the St. Cecilia HS cafeteria in Englewood, and a sleep-in shelter when Dad and/or Mom returned from work. Because it was necessary to deny homelessness as a working-class problem, there was a limit on how long a family could live in their 10 x 10, or 8 x 8 cubicle - all their possessions piled in, alongside themselves. In Hackensack there were probably more than three.

Stocks on the Verge of... Something

On the money. I love the amount of energy (& time) we waste listening to politicians, from their speeches to their debates. Haven't we agreed long ago that they're all liars?

SOB.


On Mar 11 04:18 AM mrbill wrote:

> "Wasn’t it the CEO of Bank of America (seekingalpha.com/symbo...)
> who said they had plenty of capital, but took billions in TARP —
> who then said the dividend was safe, but then cut it in half — who
> subsequently said the dividend is now safe, but cut it again to one
> penny?"
>
> Good point. Sadly most people, especially in the US have short term
> memories. In the US, not only can you fool us once, but several more
> times, and then some.

The Ugly Truth About Unemployment

Just a brief note on long term unemployment & why it's chronically understated: Any government bureaucrat, from the President of the US to a clerk in your local employment office will tell you that as long as a person continues to actively look for work, he remains in the labor force and his unemployment continues to be counted. Now, let me ask a really stupid question: If you've been out of work long enough to no longer be eligible for any kind of unemployment compensation, do you, your family, or your friends continue to report to your friendly state employment office? No one that I know does - what would be the point? To let them know you're still studying the classifieds and circling the job offerings that you've more-than-likely already called on? You're actively looking for work, but who in the BLS knows? They're much happier having you disappear from the labor force, so their numbers will look better.

Good article.

SOB.

Venezuela: Chavez's Control of Oil and Agriculture

I offer this for what it's worth: In (1998?), the formerly state-owned electric utility was privatized and sold to a foreign company, probably for peanuts, the rest going into the pockets of the politicians. This is pretty much how things work down here. With the end of the terrorist attacks against the grid at various levels shortly thereafter, due to the efforts of the executive branch to physically annihilate the terrorists, service improved enormously. Since then and for the past eight years, we have periodic shutdowns of the grid (usually about once a month) for "maintenance," and irregular patchy blackouts & brownouts due to plain inefficiency. Maybe the foreign-owned monopoly just can't afford the multi-million dollar bonuses to "attract the best people." In 2002, when my wife & I bought a condo in a thirty-year-old building to which, obviously, electricity was already flowing, we were charged by our friendly foreign utility an "installation fee" of about 100+ dollars. Needless to say that here, in one of the poorest countries in the hemisphere, far fewer people can now afford electricity.

In response to the fuel price increases, electric bills have gone up. To date, there's been no sign that they might go down, even though petroleum is trading at about $45.00/bbl.

As a result of globalization, food prices began to soar a little more than a year ago and the region in which we lived boomed. At least, there was a boom for the mining and agricultural barons and for the tiny sliver of professionals and trades people who represent the middle class. (While cops and school teachers are considered middle class in the US, down here they earn $150 and $120 per month respectively and consider themselves very fortunate to have a profession; but they are certainly not middle class.)

With the recent collapse of foreign trade, farmers have been burying their crops. My father-in-law buried his entire grape harvest except for what the family could eat. A friend of his, buried his grapes and his asparagus. My wife asked why they couldn't just give the food to the poor. The answer, of course, is that this would depress prices even more.

What I would like to impress upon yourself & your readers is that corruption isn't owned by either Chavez or socialist governments in general. The corruption in this country is so thoroughgoing it's seriously intimidating. And with regard to the Washington-sponsored myth that these are democracies because they have the vote, these presidents can change the constitution at will. So what governs them? To what or whom do they answer? The professional political class serve themselves, big money, and are acutely aware of Washington's desires, because Washington's goals are the same. Sadly, the US government has never met a right-wing dictatorship it didn't like. Here, the lowliest government bureaucrat has no fear whatever either of the law or of the rules governing his own bureaucracy and job description. I have had two appeals of a customs ruling denied by fellow bureaucrats, neither of whom had the authority to pass on an appeal. I appealed a third time. Apparently, they believed that they had nothing to fear. The problem was resolved when an earthquake took down their headquarters.

I personally have been screwed over by (in chronologically order) 1)foreign affairs, 2) police, 3) interior, and 4) customs.

Courts will deliver whatever verdict is politically most advantageous and judges have no problem with bribes. A thousand bucks delivered in an envelope to the judge's secretary and you have an inside track.

One cannot come into a state with an authoritarian culture and superimpose a democracy. The best of intentions will result in an authoritarian regime. My personal interpretation of why Law exists down here at all is to provide "plausibe deniability."

The reality of Latin America and the Caribbean is far different from the view fostered by the TV news.

Overall, a good article, but the bias is obvious. I would suggest a future article on how US foreign aid (taxpayer money) greases the rails for the big oil companies you seem to have so much sympathy for, and what happens to the people who are living on the land the BOC's want to drill on. A friend of the family used to work for one in the Amazon basin. Had to go to work with a gun to defend himself against the "terrorists" (former residents who didn't much like being disposessed). The pay was great!

SOB.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard: Time to Hit the Economic Nuclear Button

Dear Mr. Evans Pritchard,

I find the following paragraph absolutely inspirational:

"As ordinary citizens with no power over the levers of policy, we watch from the sidelines, and weep. The whole global economy has tipped into a downward spiral. Trade and output are contracting at rates that outstrip the leisurely depression of the 1930s. Debt deflation has simply washed over the drastic measures taken by governments everywhere."

Now, the idea that ordinary citizens have no power over the levers of policy could only be true in dictatorships, kingdoms, empires, oligarchies, and so on. So, if your statement is true, we do not live in a democracy. I agree: we do not.

While everyone is aghast at the notion of the nationalization of the banks, neither Payne nor Jefferson thought it was a bad idea at all. Check your history books. And the best growth record at the present time has been compiled by states with mixed economies & a pragmatic, eclectic approach to their economic problems. China's stock market is best, year to date, Sri Lanka's is second, & Venezuela's is third. Unfortunately, China's record on human rights is as bad as the record of the US when it comes to ignoring both international law & United Nations resolutions, where it is arguably number one in the world. And on the subject of human rights, Venezuela's poverty rate has declined faster than that of any third world country in the western hemisphere, with its "deep poverty" level dropping even faster. Sure, there's inflation of 30%; but that's the cost of feeding, housing, & educating your poor. Any economist will tell you that the best way to fight inflation is to tax the poor. (The US, apparently, has been following this anti-inflationary policy for several decades in one way or the other. Food, shelter, & medical care, described as rights in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, are, as you know, privileges in our country.)

The fraud that the "the free narket" will provide this for us can only be perpetrated by the falsification of numbers and the denial of reality. If you really believe that a decline in the "continuing" unemployment rate means that those unemployed workers have found jobs, you're smoking an illegal substance of extremely high quality. They have simply fallen out of the labor force and, therefore, cease to be counted as "workers." And in many minds, as people as well.

Best,
SOB.

A vote does not a democracy make. The differences between our two parties is no greater than the internal differences that exist between branches of the Republican party & branches of the Democratic party. A great fuss is made by the press about the "differences" in order to foster the illusion that every four years Americans have a choice. Is it politically correct to say "bullshit" in this space? I hope so, because a "free press" in the US is also bullshit, part of the national mythology. Like the beauty that pretends that "terrorism" is a religious thing & ignores certain geo-political realities - like oil, like the US's reflex support of anything coming out of the Knesset, no matter how illegal, immoral, or fattening. That latter support & the declaration of war which it implied against a large & important segment of the Muslim world is what brought about the strike on 9/11. Note that the "free press" has never mentioned the political demands of said terrorists because it would very seriously - and detrimentally for Washington - to the realm of US foreign policy, which regarding Israel has been a disaster for both international law, Justice, & the American people.

ETF Update: Absolutely Nothing to Love

Dear Bibicu,

Only because I sense that you're playing Democrat/Republican with us, I would submit the following, thanks to the on-line Wackypedia, written by people who obviously went to grade school but skipped grammar entirely and forever:

"Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1990 between the three nations, the leaders gathered together in San Antonio Texas on December 17, 1992 to officially sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H.W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexico's President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, made history that day when they ceremoniously signed the agreement. The agreement needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch before it could actually become law. In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" the official signing prior to the end of his last term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and "signing into law" to incoming president Bill Clinton. Prior to sending it to the House of Representatives, Clinton introduced clauses which would hopefully provide protections for American workers while placating concerns held by many of the House representatives. It also required U.S. partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own. Being able to enforce these clauses, especially with Mexico, was considered questionable, and with much consternation and emotional discussion The House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by a vote of 234 to 200. Remarkably the agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and only 102 Democrats. That unusual combination reflected the challenges President Clinton faced in convincing Congress that the controversial piece of legislation would truly benefit all Americans. The agreement was signed into law in the U.S. on December 8, 1993 by President Bill Clinton and went into effect on January 1, 1994."

Why do you continue to believe that there's a difference between the parties? Without Big Money, neither elephants nor donkeys could 1) get elected, or 2) get rich. Do you really believe that both parties would be so adamantly against eliminating campaign contributions (when they benefit neither party) if they were unable to siphon a bunch of bucks off the top for themselves? And think about why someone would give money to BOTH parties/BOTH candidates. Does charity run so deep in the veins of the rich?

I doubt it.

As for 99% of Americans knowing what mortgages cost, you seem to believe that 99% of Americans own (or their friendly mtg company owns) their house or apartment. This is seriously quaint. Charming. We, as a group of people, are richer than I ever dreamed!

At least, unlike many of our countrymen, you're thinking.

Best,
SOB.

On Mar 02 05:54 AM Bibicu Florian wrote:

> My humble comment, why this entire crisis is happening:
>
> 1. Late'80, in USA, the democrats created NAFTA. This allowed US
> greedy companies to move jobs out of country to low cost regions,
> mainly Mexico and Asia.
>
> 2. The plants started to close in US and move overseas, people started
> to loose their jobs...
>
> 3. In parallel to this, Hillary Clinton started to "volunteer" and
> "fix" the Health care system...Nothing happened...worsened......
> see under president Obama...Universal Healthcare coverage...what
> a nice dream for American people...anything happening, BTW?
>
> 4. Cheap Asian goods started to flood American market, the demand
> for more expensive American product dropped dramatically, again American
> plants reduced their production, started to close one by one, more
> lay-offs…
>
> 5. Cheap foreign labour (very much illegal) started to invade the
> US, driving down the local salaries. Life in became US harder and
> harder…
>
> 6. By loosing their jobs, more and more people could not afford to
> make anymore their mortgage payments and started loosing their houses.
>
>
> 7. American peoples are not idiot! They (99% of them) know how much
> mortgage can afford, but they cannot control for how long they will
> have a job, so they can pay the family house mortgage. As soon as
> they started to loose their jobs, again I repeat, they could not
> afford to pay anymore for the house…the financial crisis started
> to develop…but nicely covert under the name of “subprime”…
>
> 8. All the big American companies, including the auto manufacturers,
> moved the majority of their plants overseas, there are not very many
> plants left in US, so jobs are hard to be reopened on US soil, for
> American workers, because there are no more US plants left on US.
>
> No jobs, no salaries, no money for the majority of working class
> to be spent, circulate, keep the economy in motion, dynamic…
>
> 9. How Obama administration is planning to create jobs it wrong:
> they want to create jobs by fixing holes in highways, painting bridges
> and repairing schools, because these “items” can not be shipped overseas
> to be done there, at a cheaper rate, but profit for the project administrating
> company…Profit, who cares about workers…But one can not transform
> a healthy multiskilled working class (once upon a time) in a bunch
> of low level bridges painters…there are 2.5 million people out of
> jobs…bring back the jobs you moved overseas, industry, steel, electronics,
> auto, machining equipment, and so much more…
>
> 10. American people became depressed; they are not used to live in
> conditions like these. They are turning more and more toward right
> wing deep conservative-fundament... Southern-style religion, become
> violent, started to hate foreigners, immigrants, the rate of killing
> among them is increasing, same with the suicide rate…Very bad, it
> looks like there is not hope…
>
> But there are some solutions…what I said above was just the root
> cause…
>
> I will tell you more, as soon as I realise I’m not talking to the
> walls…
>
>
>
> Please find bellow my humble comment, why this entire crisis is happening:
>
>
> 1. Late'80, in USA democrats created NAFTA. This allowed US companies
> to move jobs out of country to low cost regions, mainly Mexico and
> Asia.
>
> 2. The plants started to close in US and move overseas, people started
> to loose their jobs...
>
> 3. In parallel to this, Hillary Clinton started to "volunteer" and
> "fix" the Health care system...Nothing happened...worsened......
> see under president Obama...Universal Healthcare coverage...what
> a nice dream for American people...
>
> 4. Cheap Asian goods started to flood American market, the demand
> for more expensive American product dropped dramatically, again American
> plants reduced their production, more lay-offs…
>
> 5. Cheap foreign labour (very much illegal) started to invade the
> US, driving down the local salaries. Life in became US harder and
> harder…
>
> 6. By loosing their jobs, more and more people could not afford to
> make anymore their mortgage payments and started loosing their houses.
>
>
> 7. American people are not idiot! They (99% of them) know how much
> mortgage can afford, but they cannot control for how long they will
> have a job so they can the family mortgage.
> As soon as they started to loose their jobs, again I repeat, they
> could not afford to pay anymore for the house…the crisis started
> to develop…
>
> 8. All the big companies including the auto manufacturers moved the
> majority of their plants overseas, there are not very many plants
> left in US, so jobs are hard to be reopened on US soil, for American
> workers.
>
> 9. How Obama administration is planning to create jobs it wrong:
> they want to create jobs by fixing holes in highways, painting bridges
> and repairing schools, because these “items” can not be shipped overseas…But
> one can not transform a healthy multiskilled working class in a bunch
> of low level bridge painters…there are 2.5 million people out of
> jobs…
>
> 10. American people became depressed; they are not used to live in
> conditions like these. They are turning toward right deep conservative-fundament...
> Southern-style religion, become violent, started to hate foreigners,
> immigrants, the rate of killing among them is increasing, same with
> the suicide rate…Very bad, it looks like there is not hope…
>
> 11. The same key people that created this mess by starting NAFTA
> are now back, same strategy (hope not!)
>
> But there are some solutions…what I said above was just the root
> cause…
>
> How to fix it...I will tell you more, as soon as I realise I’m not
> talking to the walls…
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Florian Bibicu
>
>
>

The Systemic Failure of Academic Economics

Dear Tim,

I find your allegation of ignorance against peoople who hold, at the very least, Master's Degrees in Finance, Economics, Management, and so on from the best universities in the country somewhat of a stretch. I think a better explanation is that they knew very well what they were doing but they also knew that there would be few negative consequences to themselves.

I've read that Paulson earned $500,000 during his tenure at Goldman; in 2004, a published speech of his showed that he was an enthusiastic supporter of the opaque, illiquid, (and very creative) instruments that have subsequently sunk the capitalist system as "self-regulating." His punishment, apparently, was to be made Secretary of the Treasury.

The lesson that business cannot be deregulated and allowed to grow to the sky on the one hand, and be backstopped by the working taxpayer (who has far fewer loopholes than have the "C's") on the other, should have been learned in the S&L crisis of the eighties, when, as I'm sure you will recall, even deposits of over a $1M were covered by government insurance, even though only a tenth of that was mandated by the FSLIC. Why? Because the banks involved had already been allowed to become too big to fail. Or because their managing bureaucrats were golfing buddies of the government bureaucratis who were deciding who would be bailed out & for how much.

The lesson that business learned was something they had already learned & taken for granted before the election of FDR in 1932 & then relearned after Reagan dismantled the New Deal, which had put limits on all kinds of combinations & monopolies & restricted the businesses that could be allowed to combine. The lesson, of course, was that it was really THEIR government. In the 19th century, it wasn't only Pinkertons that were shooting strikers, it was the national guards of the various states. Read a history of the labor movement in the United States. And Washington provides the same service today to any and all right wing dictatorships south of the Rio Grande, from supporting Samoza in Nicaragua, Batista in Cuba, the DuValier family in Haiti & keeping Jean Bertrand Aristide out of office for almost his full four year term - and then insisting that although he had never been allowed to serve his full term, it should be counted, thereby preventing him from running for re-election in December of 1994. For the facts of what really happened in 2001 involving the FRAPH, Washington intervention to "restore" Aristide, the retreat of a boatload of US Marines because there was a handful of thugs on the wharf, you'll have to go outside the commercial media, which had the American public believing that Washington was on the side of Aristide. Unfortunately for Haiti, as well-meaning as Aristide was, he was a lousy politician & administrator. But that's a topic for another day - but the handling of that situation was one of the great triumphs of 20th century propaganda.

Now we have a scant handful of conglomerates that control TV networks, radio networks, newspaper chains, book and magazine publishers, electronics manufacturers, recording studios, motion picture studios, and are free to enter any number of other industries. Five publishers produce 80% of all the books published. And God only knows how high a percentage of book retailing is controlled by just Barnes & Noble and Amazon.com.

To call a basket of PhD billionaires "ignorant" or "stupid" is, putting it kindly, somewhat ill-advised. And if they were such incompetents, why weren't they purged by this "self-regulating" system? How could they not only keep their jobs, but get paid bonuses that were, in many cases, more than the companies earned?!

Because they control the system. Control the directors. And they own the government. Paid for it in cash.

Vote Democrat or Republican & nothing will change.

SOB.

Preview from Europe: Two Day Bounce Doesn't Materialize as Markets Slump

Great cartoon. I'm glad you had the good sense & perspicacity to name your witness "dogdirt."

SOB.

Grim Outlook for Preliminary GDP of -5%

How come you guys keep talking about "trickle down," when in reality money "cascades up" in this economy? Just take a look at how much has trickled down to the worker since 1960 & compare it to how much has cascaded up to the executve suite. In 1960 one wage-earner per family could support that family. Post 1980, it took, and still takes, two.

There are any number of studies on the subject, & you sound intelligent enough to read. Try it some time, it's habit-forming. You might start here: www.econ.barnard.colum.../~econhist/papers/tren...

If you're interested in the theories advanced for the steep increase in corporate pay since the eighties, try here: findarticles.com/p/art....

Or are you more interested in propagandizing your readers?

SOB.

5 Indicators the Economy Is Recovering

Interesting commentary. I particularly like your idea that when unemployment comp runs out, people just get off their lazy asses (your implication) & take a job in "a different field."

Of course, anyone who wants to work can always find a job, right (your implication)?

SOB.

Volcker Says He Is Confident Capitalism Will Survive

"...fascism OR communism..."? Can't you tell one from the other?

That's really sad. For a model of fascism, look to Latin America with the exception of Cuba (communism) and Venezuela and Bolivia (attempts at a democratic socialism [despite the right-wing, government/business propaganda]). For communism, look to the former Soviet Union (bureaucracy managing bureaucracy managing bureaucracy, but doing a great job of producing war machines, but not good enough or they would have been able to keep up with us). Of course, going back to Latin America, then you have Brazil and Ecuador and Nicaragua, which seem to be trying (under present administrations) to preserve both a capitalist economic model with a far left ("let's put the people ahead of the billionaires") orientation. History doesn't project much success for that combination of objectives. Capital ultimately buys out the government, as in the US, and the media becomes part of the team (it is, after all, Big Business), which works (so far with enormous success) to keep the people believing that 1) they have a democracy (and they keep banging us over the head with our ability to vote) and 2) that capitalism and the market can solve every problem that can be imagined - like now. But without government intervention, where would we be? In much, much, much worse shape. Of course, no matter how bad it gets, the billionaires can't lose - they'll just become multi-millionaires. The top of the socio-economic ladder. The "fittest." Like the Romanovs.

Capitalism works to create billionaires. No socialist system can make that claim. Of course, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the top bureaucrats inherited their respective bureaus and became the new billionaires. With Harvard's blessing.

Anyway, keep on truckin'.

SOB.

On Feb 22 04:14 PM NEOCON47 wrote:

> PERFECT SPOT FOR VOLCKER TO SPEAK AT, ONE OF THE WORLD'S MUST ULTRALEFT
> UNIVERSITY'S IN THE WORLD OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST!
>
> CAPITALISM IS NOT WHAT AMERICA IS ALL ABOUT WITH GOVT. INMTERVENTION,
> ITS CALL FACISM OR COMMUNISM WITH DEMOCRACY LOSING MORE OF THEIR
> RIGHTS.
>
> CURRENTLY THE FED GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO TRUMP OVER THE RIGHTS OF
> THE STATES THE WAY I\T WAS ORIGINALLY SETUP, IF THE BIRDBRAINS LIKE
> VOLCKER SUCCEED, COMMUNISM IS NOT FAR AWAY.

21 Reasons to Be Bullish

I can identify w/ your last two short paragraphs, from "Even..." to "...near."

I'm often my own best contrary indicator.

Best,
SOB.