There is a social media revolution in Saudi Arabia ... Ten million Saudis are online, 3 million belong to Facebook, and Twitter feeds are up more than 400 percent. Recently, many tweets and posts have been focused on the uprising in Tunisia. In fact, Saudi's social media activists spread videos and news updates at the peak of the street protests — and the interest has stayed high ever since. And, now, Saudi bloggers have added the unrest in Cairo to the topics receiving much attention. Will the Saudi government clamp down on this free-wheeling speech after Tunisia's social media movement helped to bring down a government? It's one of the big questions ahead for Saudi Arabia. How this authoritarian regime will live with the freedom and chaos that the Internet represents. ... The Internet poses a challenge for this conservative, mostly religious society. – National Public Radio
Dominant Social Theme: The Jasmine revolution spread unexpectedly.
Free-Market Analysis: The civil unrest in Egypt is growing fiercer. Electronic communications have been shut down throughout Egypt and massive demonstrations have been planned for today. A changing of the guard in Egypt would be a massive political shift indeed, but what if the disturbances don't stop there? What if they ultimately spread to Saudi Arabia and end up bringing down the dollar reserve system?
We suggest this possibility because we believe there are larger forces at work in the Middle East. Could it be that the power elite itself is inciting these disturbances? Is the idea, eventually, to crash the dollar and set up a global currency in its place?
The dollar reserve system is propped up by Saudi Arabia's willingness to restrict the purchase of oil to dollars, a system that has been in place since US President Richard Nixon abrogated what remained of the gold standard in 1971. But the PE is notoriously unsentimental. The Saudi elite has grown enormously wealthy from its relationship with the US and now, perhaps, for the good of a new world order, it is time for them to go.
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jan 30, 2011 11:58:06 GMT -5
The end isn't near, we need to start living within our means for one thing. The federal government should probably never borrow money unless it is a time of war or national catastrophe. When the government borrows money it has to tax someone to pay it back which includes interest. So it is putting a burden on future tax payers who did not vote in the people that borrowed the money.
Plus we talk about wealth distribution of taxing the rich to cover social program, but this really is a transfer of wealth to the people that loaned the money to everybody that pays federal taxes, which even if you don't pay federal income tax, you might pay payroll taxes or if not even that you pay when you buy something from a company that pays taxes, because the cost of taxes are embedded in the price of the product.
I think it was Hamilton that thought a little debt was good...but what he meant was it was good for the rich guys that could loan the money to the government then tax the general populace to pay it back.
Yes, and his nemesis, Jefferson, understood exactly what Hamilton was up to. He wanted an amendment to prohibit the govt. from emitting bills of credit so that the govt. would have to tax in order to fund anything. Which means, necessarily, that wars and welfare would be dramatically reduced.