Federal Deficit Impasse

[maui1]

you can't get gov't to do anything until it becomes an immediate threat, and even with that, sometimes the feared event has to take place for the gov't to take action.

THE ONLY WAY to get gov't to look at costs, spending, fraud, theft, waste.......is to force them to.

voting against raising the debt limit, is the only way for our gov't to look at their spending and prioritize gov't services so that we get our value for our taxpayer 'buck'.

i know all the concern everyone has about being inflexible about this action, but can anyone tell me when we have been physically responsible in the past, without forced responsibility?

[flow5]

www.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/business/economy/treasury-to-weigh-which-bills-to-pay.html?_r=1&ref=business

"Officials have said repeatedly that Treasury DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY to pay bills based on POLITICAL, MORAL, OR ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS. It cannot, for instance, set aside invoices from weapons companies to preserve money for children’s programs.

The implication is that the government will NEED TO PAY BILLS IN THE ORDER THAT THEY COME DUE. President Obama has warned as a result that the government “cannot guarantee” payments of Social Security benefits or other popular programs. Officials also have disputed the assertion of some Republicans that the government could prioritize interest payments"

[maui1]

Officials have said repeatedly that Treasury DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY to pay bills based on POLITICAL, MORAL, OR ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS.

really? does anyone still listen to these people? they also said that the sub prime market was contained, they also said that we did not sell weapons to mexican cartels, they also had 3 different "last day for action" on our debt limit.

gov't officials always have something to say..........that is what they are there for.....but we don't have to take what they say for 'gospel'.

[maui1]

also.......

wtf is a gov't official anyway............yesterday he/she was your neighbor and just because he got a job in gov't he/she is an ....."OFFICIAL". give me a break.........they are just you and me with a gov't job.

[flow5]

www.nytimes.com/2011/07/25/us/politics/25legal.html

The 14th Amendment, the Debt Ceiling and a Way Out
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: July 24, 2011

WASHINGTON — A few days ago, former President Bill Clinton identified a constitutional escape hatch should President Obama and Congress fail to come to terms on a deficit reduction plan before the government hits its borrowing ceiling.

He pointed to an OBSCURE PROVISION in the 14th Amendment, saying he would unilaterally invoke it “without hesitation” to raise the debt ceiling, “and force the courts to stop me.”

On Friday, Mr. Obama rejected the idea, though not in categorical terms.

“I have talked to my lawyers,” Mr. Obama said. “They are not persuaded that that is a winning argument.”

Adding another element of uncertainty, and possible court battles, to the debate do not seem to appeal to the White House. And it is, in any event, not clear that the nation’s creditors would continue to lend money to the United States were the president to take unilateral action.

The provision in question, Section 4 of the amendment, WAS MEANT TO ENSURE THE PAYMENT OF UNION DEBTS after the Civil War and to disavow Confederate ones. But it was written in broader terms.

“The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payments of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion,” the critical sentence says, “shall not be questioned.”

The Supreme Court has said in passing that those words have outlived the historical moment that gave rise to them.

“While this provision was undoubtedly inspired by the desire to put beyond question the obligations of the government issued during the Civil War,” Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes wrote for the court in 1935, “its language indicates a broader connotation.”

In recent weeks, law professors have been trying to puzzle out the meaning and relevance of the provision. Some have joined Mr. Clinton in saying it allows Mr. Obama to ignore the debt ceiling. Others say it applies only to Congress and only to outright default on existing debts. Still others say the president may do what he wants in an emergency, with or without the authority of the 14th Amendment.

The words of the provision are in important ways quite vague. “Nobody would argue,” said Sanford Levinson, a law professor at the University of Texas, “that Section 4 is clear in its meaning, other than at the time everyone thought that the South, if they ever got back in control, would not pay Civil War debt.”

But Jack M. Balkin, a law professor at Yale, said it was possible to infer a broader principle.

“You’re not supposed to hold the validity of the public debt hostage to achieve political ends,” Mr. Balkin said. He added, though, that “Section 4 is a FAIL-SAFE that only comes into operation when everything else is exhausted.”

Mr. Obama’s statement largely dismissing the possibility of invoking the provision may have had a strategic element to it. A deficit reduction deal would seem to be more likely, after all, if both sides thought there was no alternative but economic chaos.

Mr. Obama’s reference to “a winning argument” suggested the likelihood that the courts would weigh in if he took unilateral action. But that is not certain.

“This is not a circumstance,” said Laurence H. Tribe, a law professor at Harvard, “in which the courts have any plausible point of entry.”

Professor Balkin agreed. “This is LARGELY A POLITICAL QUESTION,” he said. “It is unlikely courts would decide these questions.”

Some law professors have put forward possible legal claims that might overcome threshold requirements for lawsuits, like the one in which plaintiffs show that they have been directly injured and so have standing to sue. “It’s unthinkable,” Professor Tribe responded, “that the courts would allow a gimmicky lawsuit to proceed.”

The president, moreover, can move quickly, but court cases take time. “At the point at which the economy is melting down, who cares what the Supreme Court is going to say?” Professor Balkin said. “It’s the president’s duty to save the Republic.”

Another possible reaction to unilateral action from Mr. Obama is impeachment. Professor Tribe said that was “not politically a very plausible scenario.”

Professor Levinson was less certain. Impeachment by the House of Representatives “seems to me quite likely.” But, he added, “it is also literally unimaginable that the Senate would convict.”

A third possible response is what some law professors call “popular constitutionalism.” The meaning of the Constitution, these professors say, is in the end what the public believes it to be. The president and members of Congress may thus pay a political price for taking stands at odds with what the public understands to be their constitutional obligations.

[decoy409]

flow, they can call it all they like,things have shifted and you have to know that the Patriot Act simply is sitting and waiting along with NSDP 51. This stuff is not b.s. These have been in the making for years and they are all in those gov. law books now.

#40 - "A third possible response is what some law professors call “popular constitutionalism.” The meaning of the Constitution, these professors say, is in the end what the public believes it to be. The president and members of Congress may thus pay a political price for taking stands at odds with what the public understands to be their constitutional obligations."

And I am not saying it is the end of the world. All I am saying is that these things have been created and it's like so many simply turn their cheek and scoff at such. That's when I call out the pick and choosers of what they care to address or accept.

[flow5]

Don't expect anything unorthodox. The long-lasting debate & copious news coverage should precipitate some over-due spending reforms.

My family is helping out the tea party: "now evaluate bills, for the Tea Party, that are before...Legistators and that are related to health care. they have provided me with a check sheet that is tied to the constitution as well as checks to evaluate the cost of implementing and sustaining the law if passed. there are also guides to evaluating the effectiveness of the law and need. My evaluation goes to a small committee..., then to the Dem and Repub chairmen and then is on the desks of the house and senate reprsentative on -so they have the Tea Party evaluation usually before it goes to committee for discussion... also have former members of the legs to consult and two fantastic web sites so I can read the bills in full and know to which committee they will be refered and to several national web sites run by physicians who are concerned about govt controllled medicine..."

[smackdown]

Among the "debts" to be defaulted on, includes pension payments to former elected officials, current and future monies allocated to the pensions of current and future elected officials. Notably, none of these folks gets a corporate paycheck each Friday, they get a government allocation of pay just like armed services personnel... which don't get paid either.

The LEAST of my worries is a default on paying interest on debt notes. Can you only imagine the ire and anger of POLITICIANS cut off from the spigot? Now there's a force to be reckoned with.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

Jul 28, 2011 7:36:13 GMT -5 @smackdown said:

"we need to make major cuts in mandatory spending, too."

Foolishness. Spending is relative to revenue generation... just like in your household. You don't "cut" spending if you need what you buy. The first area where we need to investigate spending is the military machine. It would make more sense to have the spouses of soldiers buy the supplies instead of some department full of accounting types. The spouse is already working with a shortfall in revenue. The MORE IMPORTANT aspect is to create revenue where there is plenty of it. NO financial sector component should be publicly-traded. ALL of them need a flat tax or a sharp axe severing them from existence. No economy, no society, ever in history survived by making profits on it's currency by keeping it from flowing through the streets of the nation.

...it's not foolishness... we are at an impasse in deciding what we need to buy...

[flow5]

www.opednews.com/articles/Washington-s-Response-to-a-by-paul-craig-roberts-110728-724.html

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS


As the second decade of the 21st century began, the US economy had not recovered from the Great Recession that began in December 2007.

The economy's FAILURE TO RECOVER WAS DESPITE THE LARGEST FISCAL & MONETARY STIMULUS IN THE COUNTRY'S HISTORY. There was a $700 billion bank bailout, a $700 billion stimulus program, a couple of trillion in "quantitative easing," that is, in debt monetization or the printing of money to finance the government's expenditures. In addition the Federal Reserve's balance sheet had expanded by trillions of dollars as the Fed purchased troubled mortgage bonds and derivatives in its effort to keep the financial system solvent and functioning. According to the Government Accountability Office's audit of the Federal Reserve released by Senator Bernie Sanders, the Federal Reserve provided secret loans to US and foreign banks totaling $16.1 trillion, a sum larger than US Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Despite the enormous fiscal and monetary stimulus, the economy remained dead in the water.


In 2011 the deficit in the federal government's annual expenditures was 43 percent of the budget. In other words, THE US GOVERNMENT HAD TO BORROW, OR THE FED HAD TO MONETIZE, 43 percent OF FEDERAL EXPENDITURE4S DURING FISCAL YEAR 2011. Despite this unprecedented fiscal and monetary stimulus, the economy did not recover.


At the end of the first decade of the 21st century, the economy's decline was temporarily halted by federal subsidies for car and home purchases. The $8,000 housing subsidy helped newlyweds purchase starter homes as the subsidy was a big chunk of the down payment in a depressed housing market. The car purchase subsidy moved future demand into the present. When these subsidies expired, the economy's life support was turned off.


Problems with the statistical reporting of unemployment, inflation, and GDP disguised the worsening economy. Seasonal adjustments used to smooth the data over the course of the year were not designed for prolonged recession. Neither was the "birth-death" model used by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) to estimate non-reported jobs from new start-up companies and losses from companies that have gone out of business. THE BIRTH-DEATH MODEL WAS DESIGNED FOR A GROWING ECONOMY AND DURING DOWNTURNS OVERESTIMATES THE NUMBER OF NEW JOBS CREATED.


The "substitution effect" used in the consumer price index (CPI) UNDERESTIMATES INFLATION by assuming that consumers substitute cheaper foods for those that rise in price. For example, if the price of New York strip steak rises, this does not show up in the CPI, because of the assumption that people shift their purchases to a less expensive cut such as round steak.


Cooking the Books


The widely used "core inflation" measure DOES NOT INCLUDE FOOD OR ENERGY. Core inflation is a useful measure for those who want to put an optimistic spin on the outlook.


By underestimating inflation, the government can OVERESTIMATE REAL GDP GROWTH, thus creating a fictional rosy outlook. Similarly, by using the employment measure known as U.3, the government underestimates unemployment.


The "headline" unemployment rate, the one emphasized by the media and the financial press, stood at 9.2 percent in June, 2011. But this rate DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY DISCOURAGED WORKERS. A discouraged worker is a person who has ceased looking for a job, because there are no jobs to be found. A discouraged worker is not considered to be in the work force and is not counted among the U.3 unemployed. The federal government knows that this is phony and has a U.6 measure of unemployment that counts the short-term discouraged. This measure, seldom reported by the media, stood at 16.2 percent in June, 2011.


Statistician John Williams (shadowstats.com) continues to count also the long-term discouraged workers according to the way it was officially done in 1980. In June, 2011, this full measure of the US unemployment rate was 22.7 percent.


In other words, by 2011 between one-fifth and one-fourth of the US work force were without jobs.


As 2011 progressed, the United States faced three simultaneous economic crises. One crisis arose from the loss of US jobs, GDP, consumer income, and tax base caused by CORPORATIONS OFF-SHORING THEIR PRODUCTION for the US market. Instead of making their products at home with American labor and providing Americans with jobs and states and localities with tax revenues, US corporations provided countries such as China, India, and Indonesia with GDP, jobs, consumer income and a tax base. This practice meant that economic stimulus was unable to revive the US economy as Americans CANNOT BE CALLED BACK TO WORK BECAUSE OF jobs that have been moved abroad.


Another crisis was the financial crisis resulting from deregulation, fraud, and greed. Securitization of mortgages meant that issuers of mortgages no longer had any incentive to ascertain the credit worthiness of the borrower, because the issuers sold the mortgages to third parties who combined the mortgages with others and sold them to investors.


As mortgages were issued for fees, the more mortgages issued, the higher the income from fees. In order to collect fee income, some issuers faked credit reports for borrowers. With the housing market booming, many people took mortgages in order to make money on the resale of the properties. With housing prices rising rapidly, down payments and credit worthiness became concerns of the past. The financial crisis was made worse by the ability of investment banks to get around capital requirements and, thereby, leverage their equity by incurring enormous debt. When all the bubbles burst, the house of cards collapsed.


Economic Armageddon


The third crisis was the $1.5+ trillion annual federal budget deficits, which were too large to be financed without the Federal Reserve buying the Treasury's new debt issues. Known as monetizing debt, the Federal Reserve purchased the Treasury's bills, notes, and bonds by creating a checking account, which the Treasury would then draw upon to pay the government's bills. The outpouring of Treasury debt raised concerns about the dollar's exchange value and role as reserve currency, and it raised fears of inflation. Gold and silver prices rose as the dollar declined in foreign exchange markets.


Any one of these crises was serious. All together, they implied economic Armageddon.


There was no obvious way out, but even if one could be found, the government was focused elsewhere -- on wars.


In addition to ongoing military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, the US and NATO began military operations against Libya on March 19, 2011. As with the existing wars, the real purpose of the aggression against Libya was not acknowledged, but it became clear that the war's purpose was to evict China from its oil investments in eastern Libya. Unlike the previous Arab protests, the Libyan rebellion was an armed uprising in which some saw the CIA's hand.


The Libyan war upped the risk, because although hiding behind the veil of Arab protest, the US was actually confronting China. Similarly, in the US-supported armed rebellion in Syria, Washington's target was the Russian naval base at Tartus. Overthrowing the Assad government in Syria and installing a US friendly regime would put paid to Russia's naval presence in the Mediterranean.


By hiding its purposes behind Arab protests in Libya and Syria that it might have initiated, Washington avoided face-to-face conflicts with China and Russia, but nevertheless the two powers understood that Washington was striking at their interests. This elevated the recklessness of Washington's aggressive policies by initiating confrontation with two nuclear powers, one of which held financial power over the US as America's largest foreign creditor.


China's oil investments in Angola and Nigeria were another target. To counter China's economic penetration of Africa, the US created the American African Command in the closing years of the first decade of the 21st century. Disturbed by China's rise, the US undertook to prevent China from having independent sources of energy. The great game that in the past has always led to war is being played out once again.


September 11, 2001, provided Washington with a new "threat" to replace the Soviet threat, which had expired in 1991. Despite the absence of the Soviet threat, the MILITARY/SECURITY BUDGET had been kept alive for a decade. September 11, 2001, injected rapid growth into the military/security budget. A decade later the budget stood at approximately $1.1 trillion annually, or approximately 70 PERCENT OF THE FEDERAL DEFICIT which was crippling the dollar and threatening the US Treasury's credit rating.


Focused on Middle Eastern wars, Washington was losing the war for the US economy.


As the expectation of economic recovery evaporated over the course of 2011, the need for war became more imperative. (See Antiwar.com, "Sen. Graham 'Very Close' to War.")

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...lol...

[flow5]

finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/113222/why-debt-crisis-is-even-worse-than-you-think-businessweek?mod=bb-budgeting

"Even the $4 trillion "grand bargain" on debt reduction hammered out by President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) -- a deal that collapsed nearly as quickly as it came together -- would not have gotten the U.S. where it needs to be. A June analysis by the Congressional Budget Office concluded that keeping the U.S.'s ratio of debt to gross domestic product at current levels until the year 2085 (to avoid scaring off investors) would REQUIRE SPENDING CUTS, TAX HIKES, or a combination of both equal to 8.3 percent of GDP EACH YEAR FOR THE NEXT 75 years, vs. the most likely (i.e. "alternative") scenario. That translates to $15 trillion over the next decade -- or more than three times what Obama and Boehner were considering."

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...but not more than I've been offering... I've wanted to see $10T in cuts over the next decade to start...

...they should put me in charge...

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

[flow5]

July 28, 2011, 9:07 pm
dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/debt-ceiling-debate-rattles-short-term-credit-markets/?pagemode=print

Debt Ceiling Impasse Rattles Short-Term Credit Markets
By NELSON D. SCHWARTZ and AZAM AHMED

The reverberations of Washington’s impasse over a debt deal are already being felt in the short-term credit markets, a key artery of the economy that daily supplies trillions of dollars of credit.

Over the last week, big banks and companies have WITHDRAWN $37.5 billion from MONEY MARKET FUNDS THAT INVEST IN TREASURY DEBT and other ultra-safe securities, the biggest weekly drop this year. Meanwhile, in the vast market for repurchase agreements, in which many financial firms make short-term loans to one another, borrowers are beginning to demand higher yields.

These moves underscore how companies and big financial institutions are beginning to RETHINK their traditional view that notes issued by the United States Treasury are indistinguishable from cash, even though many experts say they think it is unlikely that the government would miss payments on its obligations.

The $37.5 billion drop, reported Thursday in a weekly survey by the Investment Company Institute, echoed what other analysts were seeing.

In the first three days of this week, investors pulled $17 billion from funds that invested only in government securities, a reversal of the daily inflows of $280 million for much of July, said Peter Crane, the president of Crane Data, which tracks money market mutual funds.

“It’s big, no doubt about it,” he said. “Seventeen billion isn’t a run, but it’s definitely indicative that investors are SHIFTING THEIR ASSETS. If this were to continue for another week or two, it would be very disturbing.”

Though lawmakers have been clashing all week on proposals to cut the deficit and raise the debt limit ahead of an Aug. 2 deadline set by the Treasury Department, bond markets have largely shrugged off the risk of a default or a downgrade of the Washington’s AAA credit rating.

Interest rates on longer-term Treasuries have held steady, but the yield on notes coming due next week, after the deadline, has moved sharply higher in recent days. The yield on Treasury bills coming due Aug. 4 jumped five basis points to 15 basis points, a significant move for a security that carried a yield close to zero earlier this month, said Jim Caron, head of interest rate strategy at Morgan Stanley.

“It’s a tell-tale sign of something that could reverberate if it spreads to other markets, and all the uncertainty with the debt ceiling is the functional equivalent of a tightening,” Mr. Caron said. “I don’t think there is a default risk at all but the market is saying it’s not going to take any chances.”

While money market fund managers say they are not seeing a sizable WAVE OF REDEMPTIONS yet, they are setting aside more cash, LEAVING IT AT CUSTODIAL BANK ACCOUNTS in case investors demand their money back. At Fidelity, the Boston-based firm that has $442 billion in money market assets, managers are avoiding Treasury bills that come due on Aug. 4 and Aug. 11, however unlikely a technical default may be.

“We are positioning our portfolio to respond to a downgrade or a default and we are positioning the fund to respond to redemptions,” said Robert Brown, president of money markets at Fidelity. Mr. Brown would not say how much cash was being kept at hand, but said “it’s a higher balance than one would expect to see.”

In the commercial paper market, where companies raise funds for their short-term borrowing needs, buyers are also SEEKING SHORTER-TERM PAPER.

In the last week, investors have shown signs of wanting quick access to their money, with financial borrowers raising on Wednesday only $1 million in notes that come due in 81 days or more, according to the Federal Reserve. That is down from $479 million on July 22.

At the same time, the amount of commercial paper issued with a duration of just one to four days rose to $920 million, from $771 million.

“Investors are scrambling to bolster their LIQUIDITY profile,” said Chris Conetta, head of global commercial paper trading at Barclays Capital. “They understand that a default or downgrade could be a big, systemic event.”

In the repurchase market, known as the repo market, borrowers take loans and in exchange hand over a little more than the equivalent loan amount in securities. Because of their risk-free status, Treasuries are highly FAVORED AS COLLATERAL, estimated to account for about $4 trillion in the repo markets.

The fear is that if the United States credit rating drops, the value of those treasuries could respond in kind. Borrowers would then have to post more collateral to obtain their loans, effectively RAISING THE COST OF BORROWING. That could ripple into the broader market, raising interest rates on all types of loans, analysts warn.

“The repo market is a pressure point because it can have an impact on overall credit availability, which bleeds through to mortgage rates,” said Robert Toomey, managing director at the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association. “Treasuries become a little less attractive if they are more expensive to finance.”

The overnight repo rate, which started the week at about three basis points, was about 17 basis points Thursday evening, according to Credit Suisse. That means that to finance $100 million overnight in the repo market it would now cost about $472 per day, up from about $83 on Monday.

“It’s a bigger deal than a lot of people recognize,” said Howard Simons, a strategist at Bianco Research, a bond market specialist. “If you DOWNGRADE THE SECURITIES you have to PUT MORE UP FOR COLLATERAL and that affects pretty much everybody out there who has held these in reserve. I don’t care if you’re a bank, insurance company, exchange or clearinghouse.”

To be sure, most observers say the ripples in the repo market will not be anything like those felt in the fall of 2008, when creditors lost faith in the ability of banks to pay back their short-term loans. That caused a problem for companies like General Electric, which struggled to finance its daily operations as a result. Back then, the sharp drop-off in repo lending helped bring the financial system to its knees.

“I think people are looking at the U.S. as the cleanest shirt in the dirty laundry pile,” said Jason New, a senior managing director at GSO Capital Partners.

“To me, the downgrade is not dropping a boulder in a still lake. This is dropping a pebble, but nevertheless there are still ripples.”

[smackdown]

So... you realize that the game is getting much simpler to manage. As BIG attempts to liquidate and stash the cash in ponds too small to hold what they take from the investors, it sticks out. How easy will it be to abolish the Tax Reform Act and TAX THE HELL out of stagnant cash above $1 million? We are unable to recover BECAUSE these giant hoarders exist. Dissolve them, solve all our woes at once.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...and start up other woes?

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...well, devil's advocates say that if 40 million Americans revolt, it'd constitute as a certifiable zombie attack, correct?

...how about only 1 million?

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

Jul 30, 2011 23:34:47 GMT -5 sunrnr said:

Jul 30, 2011 23:24:45 GMT -5 BeenThere...DoneThat... said:

...well, devil's advocates say that if 40 million Americans revolt, it'd constitute as a certifiable zombie attack, correct?

...how about only 1 million?

a flash mob??

...ya think?

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...well, I sure hope you're right... I do not share your "optimism" concerning quiet disinterest by the masses...

[smackdown]

I would worry a lot less about "masses" and give proper consideration to 100 million families in plight taking survival matters into independently forged plans and initiatives. A reminder that the best swordsman in France feared only one opponent... the worst swordsman in France. You should grasp the connection, it's worth your attention.

[flow5]

Well the mail man delivered a Aug 3rd social security check to my neighbor (but then discovered his error & took it back). Debt ceiling impasse a hoax?

[lifewasgood]

Hoax, a political show!

However, I don't thank SS sends checks out, it is all direct deposit from my understanding. I know military active duty and retirement is all direct deposit.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

Jul 31, 2011 11:40:28 GMT -5 sunrnr said:

Now this is truly frightening, and totally unconstitutional in my view.

The proposed Super Congress is getting even more power in the proposed bill to up the debt limit ...

www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/31/super-congress-debt-ceiling-deficit-deal_n_914272.html

Congress is spending all its time worrying about the dog chasing them into the pen for slaughter ....

OR like giving your 8 y/o the keys to the SUV and saying "travel safe now ya' hear?"

...ooh, I like that Subaru commercial where the dad is giving tips to his 4yo in the driver's seat, and then at the last minute she turns into a teenager to drive away... "we knew this day was coming, so we bought a Subaru"... a good campaign schtick...

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

Jul 31, 2011 7:00:03 GMT -5 @smackdown said:

I would worry a lot less about "masses" and give proper consideration to 100 million families in plight taking survival matters into independently forged plans and initiatives. A reminder that the best swordsman in France feared only one opponent... the worst swordsman in France. You should grasp the connection, it's worth your attention.

...millions taking matters into their own hands = masses...

[smackdown]

You miss the gist, my friends. It's not like the Tea Party- comprised mainly of NRA crackpots or Alumni societies who are individually weak so they rely on fixing the outcome by padding the cell they live in with like-kinds... it's more like when Big Business scratches it head because it spent zillions deluging us with marketing we not only threw away but got angry over and it actually compromised what little business was coming in on it's own...

When I refer to 100 million FAMILIES... that's a group of people likely to be tied down by some aspect of the organized over-control we are enduring now. That causes frustration that saps hope that forces wills to seek alternatives and when one is suppressed or boxed-- they fight for their life with everything they have. That said, we haven't gotten there yet but imagine how much cheese has been threatened by surmising that USA debt default stops paying soldiers and seniors, even just one time. The anti-aspect is-- that all three parties have been paid lucratively to argue in dysfunction. The bottom line is-- millions won't chat on Facebook about rising up, they'll just rise up. When they do, they will cause others to and so on and so on and in the process, form like disdains for those who reign. That's not likely to be just government and it might not be people at all. When it's done it won't be much fun and you'll have to cut your own grass (metaphorically speaking).

People once bought a Pet Rock in mass. Paid good money for it. Fought in the store aisles. You under-estimate the raw of the hopeless, especially now that they've tasted the cheese and have grown fond of it... and yours, if you hoarded it.

I was thinking of shorting financial brokers, too big to fail quasi-banks, too big period- banks and all platforms with college-bred programming-fed dolts at the helm. Double bet if they're Ivy League in some sort of alumni group or society. Are those folks living the fantasy or what?

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

>>> I was thinking of shorting financial brokers, too big to fail quasi-banks, too big period- banks and all platforms with college-bred programming-fed dolts at the helm. Double bet if they're Ivy League in some sort of alumni group or society. Are those folks living the fantasy or what? <<<


...then what, exactly, are you suggested that the US govt. do?

[blebs]

I have seen the end. No one was spared. Not even the children.

[smackdown]

"Don't underestimate me." Not trying to and THANK YOU for all this Point and Counterpoint! What I'm referring to with the Worst Swordsman and the random 100 million concepts are-- the unknown variable that cannot be justified, speculated on or accounted for. You are correct about the need for a common denominator or catalyst event but I'm doubting that it needs to be cataclysmic at this point. A small spark started a universe with a BANG... a premature half-ass "deal" tomorrow that sets the financial sector off in a power frenzy could easily do it.