Tomorrow's Jew Scams... (Newsletter based on 'Tomorrow's Gold' by Marc Faber)

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Shortly, we will be starting a new monthly newsletter here at TIU entitled "Tomorrow's Jew Scams" which will shed light on developing Global Financial Scams led primarily by the J-Tribe "Synagogue of Satan".   Topics, reviews and article contributions are welcome... attacks on Jewish Financial Shennanigans and Chicanery will be delivered with incisive commentary.  --CSR

Two weeks ago I was sitting in the dentists chair. When he finished sticking his instruments in his mouth, we talked for a few minutes about the stock market. He expressed the common hope of the moment that the war in Iraq will make everything good again. When I told him why that wasn't likely to happen, he made the remark that there is so much "money on the sidelines" that it will have to go back into stocks eventually. He probably heard that from CNBC. "There is a whole world out there!"

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

This article clearly shows Scamming Jews basically farming out the US to Asia... a "Tomorrow Scam" supported by Jews the world over... --CSR

---------

How The Foreign Laundromat Trashed the U.S. Economy
Economics / US Economy Apr 02, 2011 - 10:39 AM

By: Andrew_Butter

Economics

Diamond Rated - Best Financial Markets Analysis ArticleI was looking at Vietnam recently. Apparently the streets are paved with gold and so I'm going over next week to check that out, but I'm getting more confused by the minute.

On one hand (supposedly) FDI is pouring into Vietnam, on the other hand, you read in the Financial Times that the Vietnamese are sending their gold jewellery to Switzerland to be melted down and turned into ingots to be stored in a vault (outside Vietnam). Or converted into a "hard" currency...although there again, there is a bit of a debate going on these days about where you might find one of those?

On reflection, that makes sense, "foreign" money in Vietnam and in many developing countries (India and China for example); get's a much better deal, particularly with regard to the risk of confiscation, than home-grown wealth (unless of course you have connections). On (more) reflection, it's the same deal in USA.

Here is a statistic everyone knows, "50% of the earnings of S&P 500 Companies are made outside America". <---- JEW SCAM!

That's good news Eh!?

"Can-do" American corporations bravely ventured abroad to earn money so they could bring it back home to buy...apple-pie for mom...an SUV for Melanie...plus enough military ordinance to keep the loved ones "safe" from any imaginable threat, and of course to pay for the "luxury" of the most expensive medical care in the world!

Err...well, as the diplomat said, "Good News...Up to a point".

The point is how much of that money got "lost" on the way back; or more to the point, laundered out of the watchful gaze of the IRS and the Tort Lawyers?

This is how it works.

You have assets in USA that make money, plus more relevant to the modern world you have "intangible value" like a brand (Coca Cola), or intellectual capital (Apple).

Assets as in "things", are much easier for tax-men and tort-lawyers to confiscate, than "intangibles". You don't "amortize" those like you do computers, machinery etc, "strictly" in accordance with what the tax-code proscribes, and you can't carry them away with a writ any-more than you can cut out a pound of a man's flesh without spilling a drop of blood.

In fact, managed properly, that stuff usually goes up in value over time, that's the reason Intel and Apple can put blow-your-socks-off new products on the market; they have both the brand (people trust their new products), and they also have the intellectual capital to come up with new ideas. Or in case you are Microsoft, which hasn't had an original idea in its life, to re-package other peoples ideas.

In essence, the beauty of that "intangible" stuff is it's devilishly hard for the tort and tax lawyers to get their claws into it.

So here's an idea, you let your manufacturing capability in USA get run down to nothing, and you allocate all the losses you can muster to that part of your enterprise, and eventually you "sadly" close it down, and gratefully "take the hit" on the part of the balance sheet where the "hard" stuff is located. There are plenty of good reasons to loose money in an enterprise in America and plenty of ways to do it, like you can charge the old factory, for the R&D you will spend building a new one in China.

Then you borrow money in USA collateralized by your intellectual property and your brand. Why in USA? Well the US government (particularly the pork-chop Congress), and its agents such as the Fed and Fannie and Freddie, have been subsidizing borrowing for years. So the Land-of-the-Free-Lunch was and still is by far the cheapest place to borrow in the world, and the cherry-on-the-cake is that if you play your cards right, you can get a tax-break on the interest you pay.

Then you invest that (borrowed) money in a more "friendly" environment (as in tax-and-tort-free Zones), to buy spanking new equipment and build a new factory.

If you want to be very clever you set up a JV or an off-take deal with people who own the easily confiscated stuff. You put in equity (you call it equity – even though it was borrowed in USA), plus you put in the intellectual capital (impossible to value), and the other guys puts in the land and the (cheap) labour, and pays off whoever needs to be paid off to make sure "order" is maintained.

And of course the agreement you have is written up in a mind-bogglingly complicated five-hundred page document in some obscure language like Ancient Latin or Sanskrit. On top of that you arrange the financial year to coincide with the local horoscope, just in case some enterprising tax-inspector or tort-lawyer decides to fly in to try and do a bit of confiscation, in which case you can say "sorry mate, but our financial year ends in two months time, come back after you have read and inwardly digested our Articles of Association".

All you need is a good lawyer plus a Big Four Accountant. The accountant is the key; I know that because once it was the "Big Five" and back-then I worked for Number Five (Arthur Andersen). Managing those sorts of scenario, was one of their core businesses. Just for the record I got fired from that job for sending an e-mail to the QA jerks in Switzerland, saying that a senior partner was a FFFFFF crook. That was five years before ENRON blew and back then, even thinking such a thought was considered to be totally "outrageous"; everyone told me I shouldn't have been so "emotional", particularly my wife.

This is how that sweetheart deal played out:  



You won't find that chart anywhere, but the numbers aren't hard to find, they are in black and white on the BEA website under "International Transactions".




Starting from the top:

Red Line:
That's the total U.S. Foreign debt outstanding which includes "Official" obligations (i.e. to other sovereign states (Line 57)), plus sales of U.S. Treasuries to "non-official" punters (Line 65), plus sales of "U.S. securities other than U.S. Treasuries" (fondly referred to as "Toxic Assets" by some people, as in TARP (Line 66)).

There is a "doom & gloom" story going around saying that America owes $4.5 trillion to foreign governments and that's a very-bad-thing...well sorry to be a killjoy, but that's not even the half of it, America as a whole owes just under 100% of its annual GDP to foreigners, that's about 25% of all the money America as a whole has borrowed at this point in time.

That's quite a lot of money, by way of comparison the estimated "mark-to-market" value of all the commercial real estate in USA right now is $3.5 Trillion down from $6.5 Trillion at the height of the bubble.

The Blue Line:
That's the "Good News", add up all the money Americans have shipped abroad since whenever, and that adds up to almost as much as it owes, and that's just "book value" not counting any re-invested profits or growth in the value of the assets that were bought.

So theoretically, if the "Aliens" asked for their money back, America (as a whole) could liquidate their assets abroad and pay their debts!!

Phew, and that makes a mockery of all the hysteria about Debt to GDP ratios in USA, when 25% of the debt is "covered".

Well perhaps more than covered, which is where I'm going (below). Notice how about $1 trillion of FDI got repatriated when the credit crunch hit, presumably used to pay back debts that couldn't easily be rolled over, and how that affected the total foreign debt line (that's important).


The Orange Line:
That's how much income got generated by the investments Americans made outside America, cumulative since 1960. Great Return on Investment...more on that later too.

The Purple Line:
That's direct investment as opposed to buying bonds and stocks in companies, nice steady line, and no blip when the credit crunch hit.

What intrigues me is this:

First off, the way the foreign debt got piled on (money coming in) is sort of mirrored by the way that Americans invested money abroad (money going out). As if America was a sort of Laundromat, money comes in, gets "cleaned" and then it goes out again.

Except in most cases the "collateral" for the debt was assets in USA, as if American borrowed money, putting up their US assets, so they could get the cash to invest abroad.



The other thing that's weird is the "Return" on investment.

Just to explain, that chart shows the nominal yield on the "book value" (i.e. the cumulative amount of FDI going out", as in "income" that came back to USA thanks to that investment.

Notice how when the credit crunch hit, magically, the repatriated "income" surged, which is funny since the whole world was supposed to have been in dire straights. Yet in spit of that "income" on the investments abroad, went up 40%.

WOW!! That sounds too good to be true. Or perhaps there was money standing-by ready to be liquidated, as in profits that the IRS and the Tort Lawyers didn't know about?

That sounds more likely.

Translating that into English, it often makes more sense for Americans and American corporations to make investments outside of USA, and to create jobs outside of USA, because the chances of American money, getting "confiscated" in America, is much higher than it is outside America.

Hence the Laundromat, the system in America is weighted towards low taxes for individuals, particularly rich individuals, and low taxes on things like gasoline (compared to anywhere else in the world that imports so much oil), plus occasional government efforts to "stimulate" the economy by subsidising borrowing.

Yet corporate taxes are high and corporations suffer from a perception that they "exploit", and are thus fair-game.

Get on the wrong side of the US "system" and you can discover insanity on a monumental scale, from McDonalds getting successfully sued for selling hot coffee to a lady who put it between her legs in her car, and then braked, or one I will never forget reading about, of how a 13 year old entrepreneur got caught selling dope out of the back window of his grandmother's house, and the judge seized the house and threw the kid; and the grandmother out on the street. Yet it's OK to burn a Koran when you know that will incite violence, because that's Free-Speech.

That sort of insanity prevails throughout America, apparently the federal tax code is 70,000 pages, and everyone is paranoid about Tort-Lawyers. Remember the Toyota recall, when it was discovered that a dozen or so "senior citizens" had pressed the wrong pedal, and the head of Toyota got hauled up in front of the US Congress for a public spanking.

Great TV, but there again, try following where the money goes when that sort of thing is commonplace.

So, US corporations take advantage of the subsidized debt, and invest it abroad (thank you very much); that way they can avoid punitive taxation, and punitive regulation.

How more of that is going to help America grow its way out of the hole it dug for itself, is less than clear.

By Andrew Butter

Twenty years doing market analysis and valuations for investors in the Middle East, USA, and Europe; currently writing a book about BubbleOmics. Andrew Butter is managing partner of ABMC, an investment advisory firm, based in Dubai ( http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article27318.html

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

This one looks back at "Yesterday's Jew Scams" caused by International Jewry.... --CSR  

--------------

MUNICH

SPEECH OF APRIL 12, 1922

    AFTER the War production had begun again and it was thought that better times were coming, Frederick the Great after the Seven Years War had, as the result of superhuman efforts, left Prussia without a penny of debt: at the end of the World War Germany was burdened with her own debt of some 7 or 8 milliards of marks and beyond that was faced with the debts of 'the rest of the world' - the so-called 'reparations.' The product of Germany's work thus belonged not to the nation, but to her foreign creditors: 'it was carried endlessly in trains for territorities beyond our frontiers.' Every worker had to support another worker, the product of whose labor was commandeered by the foreigner. 'The German people after twenty-five or thirty years, in consequence of the fact that it will never be able to pay all that is demanded of it, will have so gigantic a sum still owing that practically it will be forced to produce more than it does today.' What will the end be? and the answer to that question is 'Pledging of our land, enslavement of our labor-strength. Therefore, in the economic sphere, November 1918 was in truth no achievement, but it was the beginning of our collapse.' And in the political sphere we lost first our military prerogatives, and with that loss went the real sovereignty of our State, and then our financial independence, for there remained always the Reparations Commission so that 'practically we have no longer a politically independent German Reich, we are already a colony of the outside world. We have contributed to this because so far as possible we humiliated ourselves morally, we positively destroyed our own honor and helped to befoul, to besmirch, and to deny everything which we previously held as sacred.' If it be objected that the Revolution has won for us gains in social life: they must be extraordinarily secret, these social gains - so secret that one never sees them in practical life - they must just run like a fluid through our German atmosphere. Some one may say 'Well, there is the eight-hour day!' And was a collapse necessary to gain that? And will the eight-hour day be rendered any more secure through our becoming practically the bailiff and the drudge of the other peoples? One of these days France will say: You cannot meet your obligations, you must work more. So this achievement of the Revolution is put in question first of all by the Revolution.

    Then some one has said: 'Since the Revolution the people has gained Rights. The people governs!' Strange! The people has now been ruling three years and no one has in practice once asked its opinion. Treaties were signed which will hold us down for centuries: and who has signed the treaties? The people? No! Governments which one fine day presented themselves as Governments. And at their election the people had nothing to do save to consider the question: there they are already, whether I elect them or not. If we elect them, then they are there through our election. But since we are a self-governing people, we must elect the folk in order that they may be elected to govern us.

    Then it was said, 'Freedom has come to us through the Revolution.' Another of those things that one cannot see very easily! It is of course true that one can walk down the street, the individual can go into his workshop and he can go out again: here and there he can go to a meeting. In a word, the individual has liberties. But in general, if he is wise, he will keep his mouth shut. For if in former times extraordinary care was taken that no one should let slip anything which could be treated as lèse-majesté, now a man must take much greater care that he doesn't say anything which might represent an insult to the majesty of a member of Parliament.

    And if we ask who was responsible for our misfortune, then we must inquire who profited by our collapse. And the answer to that question is that 'Banks and Stock Exchanges are more flourishing than ever before.' We were told that capitalism would be destroyed, and when we ventured to remind one or other of these famous statesmen and said 'Don't forget hat Jews too have capital,' then the answer was: 'What are you worrying about? Capitalism as a whole will now be destroyed, the whole people will now be free. We are not fighting Jewish or Christian capitalism, we are fighting very capitalism: we are making the people completely free.'

    Christian capitalism' is already as good as destroyed, the international Jewish Stock Exchange capital gains in proportion as the other loses ground. It is only the international Stock Exchange and loan-capital, the so-called 'supra-state capital,' which has profited from the collapse of our economic life, the capital which receives its character from the single supra-state nation which is itself national to the core, which fancies itself to be above all other nations, which places itself above other nations and which already rules over them.

    The international Stock Exchange capital would be unthinkable, it would never have come, without its founders the supra-national, because intensely national, Jews....

    The Jew has not grown poorer: he gradually gets bloated, and, if you don't believe me, I would ask you to go to one of our health-resorts; there you will find two sorts of visitors: the German who goes there, perhaps for the first time for a long while, to breathe a little fresh air and to recover his health, and the Jew who goes there to lose his fat. And if you go out to our mountains, whom do you find there in fine brand-new yellow boots with splendid rucksacks in which there is generally nothing that would really be of any use? And why are they there? They go up to the hotel, usually no further than the train can take them: where the train stops, they stop too. And then they sit about somewhere within a mile from the hotel, like blow-flies round a corpse.

    These are not, you may be sure, our working classes: neither those working with the mind, nor with the body. With their worn clothes they leave the hotel on one side and go on climbing: they would not feel comfortable coming into this perfumed atmosphere in suits which date from 1913 or 1914. No, assuredly the Jew has suffered no privations! . . .

    While now in Soviet Russia the millions are ruined and are dying, Chicherin - and with him a staff of over 200 Soviet Jews - travels by express train through Europe, visits the cabarets, watches naked dancers perform for his pleasure, lives in the finest hotels, and does himself better than the millions whom once you thought you must fight as 'bourgeois.' The 400 Soviet Commissars of Jewish nationality - they do not suffer; the thousands upon thousands of sub-Commissars -they do not suffer. No! all the treasures which the 'proletarian' in his madness took from the 'bourgeoise' in order to fight so-called capitalism - they have all gone into their hands. Once the worker appropriated the purse of the landed proprietor who gave him work, he took the rings, the diamonds and rejoiced that he had now got the treasures which before only the 'bourgeoisie' possessed. But in his hands they are dead things - they are veritable death-gold. They are no profit to him. He is banished into his wilderness and one cannot feed oneself on diamonds. For a morsel of bread he gives millions in objects of value. But the bread is in the hands of the State Central Organization and this is in the hands of the Jews: so everything, everything that the common man thought that he was winning for himself, flows back again to his seducers.

    And now, my dear fellow-countrymen, do you believe that these men, who with us are going the same way, will end the Revolution? They do not wish the end of the Revolution, for they do not need it. For them the Revolution is milk and honey.

    And further they cannot end the Revolution. For if one or another amongst the leaders were really not seducer but seduced, and today, driven by the inner voice of horror at his crime, were to step before the masses and make his declaration: 'We have all deceived ourselves: we believed that we could lead you out of misery, but we have in fact led you into a misery which your children and your children's children must still bear' - he cannot say that, he dare not say that, he would on the public square or in the public meeting be torn in pieces.

    But amongst the masses there begins to flow a new stream - a stream of opposition. It is the recognition of the facts which is already in pursuit of this system, it already is hunting the system down; it will one day scourge the masses into action and carry the masses along with it. And these leaders, they see that behind them the anti-Semitic wave grows and grows; and when the masses once recognize the facts, that is the end of these leaders.

    And thus the Left is forced more and more to turn to Bolshevism. In Bolshevism they see today the sole, the last possibility of preserving the present state of affairs. They realize quite accurately that the people is beaten so long as Brain and Hand can be kept apart. For alone neither Brain nor Hand can really oppose them. So long therefore as the Socialist idea is coined only by men who see in it a means for disintegrating a nation, so long can they rest in peace.

    But it will be a sorry day for them when this Socialist idea is grasped by a Movement which unites it with the highest Nationalist pride, with Nationalist defiance, and thus places the Nation's Brain, its intellectual workers, on this ground. Then this system will break up, and there would remain only one single means of salvation for its supporters: viz. to bring the catastrophe upon us before their own ruin, to destroy the Nation's Brain, to bring it to the scaffold - to introduce Bolshevism.

    So the Left neither can nor will help. On the contrary, their first lie compels them constantly to resort to new lies. There remains then the Right. And this party of the Right meant well, but it cannot do what it would because up to the present time it has failed to recognize a whole series of elementary principles.

    In the first place the Right still fails to recognize the danger. These gentlemen still persist in believing that it is a question of being elected to a Landtag or of posts as ministers or secretaries. They think that the decision of a people's destiny would mean at worst nothing more than some damage to their so-called bourgeois-economic existence. They have never grasped the fact that this decision threatens their heads. They have never yet understood that it is not necessary to be an enemy of the Jew for him to drag you one day, on the Russian model, to the scaffold. They do not see that it is quite enough to have a head on your shoulders and not to be a Jew: that will secure the scaffold for you.

    In consequence their whole action today is so petty, so limited, so hesitating and pusillanimous. They would like to - but they can never decide on any great deed, because they fail to realize the greatness of the whole period.

    And then there is another fundamental error: they have never got it clear in their own minds that there is a difference or how great a difference there is between the conception 'National' and the word 'dynastic' or 'monarchistic.' They do not understand that today it is more than ever necessary in our thoughts as Nationalists to avoid anything which might perhaps cause the individual to think that the National Idea was identical with petty everyday political views. They ought day by day to din into the ears of the masses: 'We want to bury all the petty differences and to bring out into the light the big things, the things we have in common which bind us to one another. That should weld and fuse together those who have still a German heart and a love for their people in the fight against the common hereditary foe of all Aryans. How afterward we divide up this State, friends - we have no wish to dispute over that! The form of a State results from the essential character of a people, results from necessities which are so elementary and powerful that in time every individual will realize them without any disputation when once all Germany is united and free.'

    And finally they all fail to understand that we must on principle free ourselves from any class standpoint. It is of course very easy to call out to those on the Left, 'You must not be proletarians, leave your class-madness,' while you yourselves continue to call yourself 'bourgeois.' They should learn that in a single State there is only one supreme citizen - right, one supreme citizen - honor, and that is the right and the honor of honest work. They should further learn that the social idea must be the essential foundation for any State, otherwise no State can permanently endure.

    Certainly a government needs power, it needs strength. It must, I might almost say, with brutal ruthlessness press through the ideas which it has recognized to be right, trusting to the actual authority of its strength in the State. But even with the most ruthless brutality it can ultimately prevail only if what it seeks to restore does truly correspond to the welfare of a whole people.

    That the so-called enlightened absolutism of a Frederick the Great was possible depended solely on the fact that, though this man could undoubtedly have decided 'arbitrarily' the destiny - for good or ill - of his so-called 'subjects,' he did not do so, but made his decisions influenced and supported by one thought alone, the welfare of his Prussian people. It was this fact only that led the people to tolerate willingly, nay joyfully, the dictatorship of the great king.

    AND THE RIGHT HAS FURTHER COMPLETELY FORGOTTEN THAT DEMOCRACY IS FUNDAMENTALLY NOT GERMAN: IT IS JEWISH. It has completely forgotten that this Jewish democracy with its majority decisions has always been without exception only a means towards the destruction of any existing Aryan leadership. The Right does not understand that directly every small question of profit or loss is regularly put before so-called 'public opinion,' he who knows how most skilfully to make this 'public opinion' serve his own interests becomes forthwith master in the State. And that can be achieved by the man who can lie most artfully, most infamously; and in the last resort he is not the German, he is, in Schopenhauer's words, 'the great master in the art of lying' - the Jew.

    And finally it has been forgotten that the condition which must precede every act is the will and the courage to speak the truth - and that we do not see today either in the Right or in the Left.

    There are only two possibilities in Germany; do not imagine that the people will forever go with the middle party, the party of compromises; one day it will turn to those who have most consistently foretold the coming ruin and have sought to dissociate themselves from it. And that party is either the Left: and then God help us! for it will lead us to complete destruction - to Bolshevism, or else it is a party of the Right which at the last, when the people is in utter despair, when it has lost all its spirit and has no longer any faith in anything, is determined for its part ruthlessly to seize the reins of power - that is the beginning of resistance of which I spoke a few minutes ago. Here, too, there can be no compromise - there are only two possibilities: either victory of the Aryan, or annihilation of the Aryan and the victory of the Jew.

    It is from the recognition of this fact, from recognizing it, I would say, in utter, dead earnestness, that there resulted the formation of our Movement. There are two principles which, when we founded the Movement, we engraved upon our hearts: first, to base it on the most sober recognition of the facts, and second, to proclaim these facts with the most ruthless sincerity.

    And this recognition of the facts discloses at once a whole series of the most important fundamental principles which must guide this young Movement which, we hope, is destined one day for greatness:

    1. 'NATIONAL' AND 'SOCIAL' ARE TWO IDENTICAL CONCEPTIONS. It was only the Jew who succeeded, through falsifying the social idea and turning it into Marxism, not only in divorcing the social idea from the national, but in actually representing them as utterly contradictory. That aim he has in fact achieved. At the founding of this Movement we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sincerity of our will, we christened it ''National Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the people and, if necessary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the community of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it.

    2. And then we said to ourselves: THERE ARE NO SUCH THINGS AS CLASSES: THEY CANNOT BE. Class means caste and caste means race. If there are castes in India, well and good; there it is possible, for there there were formerly Aryans and dark aborigines. So it was in Egypt and in Rome. But with us in Germany where everyone who is a German at all has the same blood, has the same eyes, and speaks the same language, here there can be no class, here there can be only a single people and beyond that nothing else. Certainly we recognize, just as anyone must recognize, that there are different 'occupations' and 'professions' [Stände]-there is the Stand of the watchmakers, the Stand of the common laborers, the Stand of the painters or technicians, the Stand of the engineers, officials, etc. Stände there can be. But in the struggles which these Stände have amongst themselves for the equalization of their economic conditions, the conflict and the division must never be so great as to sunder the ties of race.

    And if you say 'But there must after all be a difference between the honest creators and those who do nothing at all' - certainly there must! That is the difference which lies in the performance of the conscientious work of the individual. Work must be the great connecting link, but at the same time the great factor which separates one man from another. The drone is the foe of us all. But the creators - it matters not whether they are brain workers or workers with the hand - they are the nobility of our State, they are the German people!

    We understand under the term 'work' exclusively that activity which not only profits the individual but in no way harms the community, nay rather which contributes to form the community.

    3. And in the third place IT WAS CLEAR TO US THAT THIS PARTICULAR VIEW IS BASED ON AN IMPULSE WHICH SPRINGS FROM OUR RACE AND FROM OUR BLOOD. We said to ourselves that race differs from race and, further, that each race in accordance with its fundamental demands shows externally certain specific tendencies, and these tendencies can perhaps be most clearly traced in their relation to the conception of work. The Aryan regards work as the foundation for the maintenance of the community of people amongst it members. The Jew regards work as the means to the exploitation of other peoples. The Jew never works as a productive creator without the great aim of becoming the master. He works unproductively using and enjoying other people's work. And thus we understand the iron sentence which Mommsen once uttered: 'The Jew is the ferment of decomposition in peoples,' that means that the Jew destroys and must destroy because he completely lacks the conception of an activity which builds up the life of the community. And therefore it is beside the point whether the individual Jew is 'decent' or not. In himself he carries those characteristics which Nature has given him, and he cannot ever rid himself of those characteristics. And to us he is harmful. Whether he harms us consciously or unconsciously, that is not our affair. We have consciously to concern ourselves for the welfare of our own people.

    4. And fourthly WE WERE FURTHER PERSUADED THAT ECONOMIC PROSPERITY IS INSEPARABLE FROM POLITICAL FREEDOM AND THAT THEREFORE THAT HOUSE OF LIES, 'INTERNATIONALISM,' MUST IMMEDIATELY COLLAPSE. We recognized that freedom can eternally be only a consequence of power and that the source of power is the will. Consequently the will to power must be strengthened in a people with passionate ardor. And thus we realized fifthly that

    5. WE AS NATIONAL SOCIALISTS and members of the German Workers party - a Party pledged to work - MUST BE ON PRINCIPLE THE MOST FANATICAL NATIONALISTS. We realized that the State can be for our people a paradise only if the people can hold sway therein freely as in a paradise: we realized that a slave state will never be a paradise, but only - always and for all time - a hell or a colony.

    6. And then sixthly we grasped the fact that POWER IN THE LAST RESORT IS POSSIBLE ONLY WHERE THERE IS STRENGTH, and that strength lies not in the dead weight of numbers but solely in energy. Even the smallest minority can achieve a mighty result if it is inspired by the most fiery, the most pas sionate will to act. World history has always been made by minorities. And lastly

    7. If one has realized a truth, that truth is valueless so long as there is lacking the indomitable will to turn this realization into action!

    These were the foundations of our Movement - the truths on which it was based and which demonstrated its necessity.

    For three years we have sought to realize these fundamental ideas. And of course a fight is and remains a fight. Stroking in very truth will not carry one far. Today the German people has been beaten by a quite other world, while in its domestic life it has lost all spirit; no longer has it any faith. But how will you give this people once more firm ground beneath its feet save by the passionate insistence on one definite, great, clear goal?

    Thus we were the first to declare that this peace treaty was a crime. Then folk abused us as 'agitators.' We were the first to protest against the failure to present this treaty to the people before it was signed. Again we were called 'agitators.' We were the first to summon men to resistance against being reduced to a continuing state of defenselessness. Once more we were 'agitators.' At that time we called on the masses of the people not to surrender their arms, for the surrender of one's arms would be nothing less than the beginning of enslavement. We were called, no, we were cried down as, 'agitators.' We were the first to say that this meant the loss of Upper Silesia. So it was, and still they called us 'agitators.' We declared at that time that compliance in the question of Upper Silesia MUST have as its consequence the awakening of a passionate greed which would demand the occupation of the Ruhr. We were cried down ceaselessly, again and again. And because we opposed the mad financial policy which today will lead to our collapse, what was it that we were called repeatedly once more? 'Agitators,' And today?

    And finally we were also the first to point the people on any large scale to a danger which insinuated itself into our midst - a danger which millions failed to realize and which will nonetheless lead us all into ruin - the Jewish danger. And today people are saying yet again that we were 'agitators.' I would like here to appeal to a greater than I, Count Lerchenfeld. He said in the last session of the Landtag that his feeling 'as a man and a Christian' prevented him from being an anti-Semite. I SAY: MY FEELING AS A CHRISTIAN POINTS ME TO MY LORD AND SAVIOUR AS A FIGHTER. IT POINTS ME TO THE MAN WHO ONCE IN LONELINESS, SURROUNDED ONLY BY A FEW FOLLOWERS, RECOGNIZED THESE JEWS FOR WHAT THEY WERE AND SUMMONED MEN TO THE FIGHT AGAINST THEM AND WHO, GOD'S TRUTH! WAS GREATEST NOT AS SUFFERER BUT AS FIGHTER. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and of adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before - the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice. And as a man I have the duty to see to it that human society does not suffer the same catastrophic collapse as did the civilization of the ancient world some two thousand years ago - a civilization which was driven to its ruin through this same Jewish people.

    Then indeed when Rome collapsed there were endless streams of new German bands flowing into the Empire from the North; but, if Germany collapses today, who is there to come after us? German blood upon this earth is on the way to gradual exhaustion unless we pull ourselves together and make ourselves free!

    And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly, it is the distress which daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. And when I look on my people I see it work and work and toil and labor, and at the end of the week it has only for its wage wretchedness and misery. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom today this poor people is plundered and exploited.

    And through the distress there is no doubt that the people has been aroused. Externally perhaps apathetic, but within there is ferment. And many may say, 'It is an accursed crime to stir up passions in the people.' And then I say to myself: Passion is already stirred through the rising tide of distress, and one day this passion will break out in one way or another: AND NOW I WOULD ASK THOSE WHO TODAY CALL US 'AGITATORS': 'WHAT THEN HAVE YOU TO GIVE TO THE PEOPLE AS A FAITH TO WHICH IT MIGHT CLING?'

    Nothing at all, for you yourselves have no faith in your own prescriptions.

    That is the mightiest thing which our Movement must create: for these widespread, seeking and straying masses a new Faith which will not fail them in this hour of confusion, to which they can pledge themselves, on which they can build so that they may at least find once again a place which may bring calm to their hearts.

http://www.hitler.org/speeches/04-12-22.html

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

C.H.S has the on-going J-Triber .. .. Lying Scam nailed cold... another "Tomorrow Jew Scam" as the "Con" is still developing. --CSR

----------


Here's the Setup for the Con of the Decade

April 15, 2011     (Mobile version)


The Con of the Decade, which I described last July, is being set up nicely.

I described The Con of the Decade last July (2010). The Con makes me a heretic in the cult religion of Hyperinflation. I consider myself an agnostic about the destruction of the U.S. dollar and hyperinflation (basically the same thing), but my idea that hyperinflation is fundamentally a political process makes me a heretic. I skimmed a few of the dozens of comments posted on Rick's Picks and Zero Hedge after they posted one of my expositions on this dynamic, and didn't see even one comment in favor of this perspective.

The Con is being set up right now, and the outlines are clearly visible. The Con works like this:

1. The Financial Elites/Oligarchy raked in billions in private profit from the orgy of leverage, credit expansion, fraud, embezzlement and misrepresentation of risk that resulted in the Housing Bubble.

2. The losses were transferred to the public (Federal government, i.e. The Central State) or its proxy, the Federal Reserve (i.e. the central bank), via bailouts, backstops, guarantees, the Fed's purchase of taxic assets, and an open window for the financiers to borrow billions at zero interest (ZIRP) for further speculations.

3. The Treasury now borrows $1.6 trillion every year, fully 11% of the nation's GDP, as the Central State has replaced private demand and credit expansion with its own borrowing and spending.

4. Non-U.S. central banks have largely ceased to support this unprecedented scale of borrowing, so the Federal Reserve now buys most of the Treasury's issuance of debt via QE2 (quantitative easing, the direct purchase of $600 billion in Treasury bonds).

5. Unlike Japan, the U.S. cannot self-fund its own government borrowing: while U.S. investors, banks and insurance companies do own a significant chunk of Treasuries, the U.S. savings rate (capital accumulation) is still abysmally low, around 4%, which is half the historical average savings rate.

This is the result of the Keynesian Cult's One Big Idea, which is to pull demand forward and encourage borrowing and spending now by any means necessary, and thus sacrifice capital formation/saving.

So the basic outline of the Con is that private losses from the financialization of the U.S. economy were shifted to the public. Now to keep the Status Quo and Financial Plutocracy from imploding, the public is on the hook for $1.6 trillion in additional borrowing every year until Doomsday (around 2021 or so).

Having secured the backing of the Central Bank and Central State, the Plutocracy's only problem now is that it needs a risk-free source of high-yield income. Yes, it has a trillion dollars or so sitting in bank reserves, collecting interest from the Federal Reserve; this is certainly risk-free, but the Fed's Zero Interest Rate Policy (ZIRP) keeps the rate of return absurdly low.

Here's where we see the Con taking shape. The ideal setup for risk-free returns is to own Treasurys that pay a high yield. The way to get higher interest rates is to first make the Treasury market supremely dependent on a central bank or single buyer: Done. That buyer is the Federal Reserve.

Next, have that buyer stop buying. Suddenly, interest rates start moving up. If you don't believe this is possible, or part of a larger project, then please explain why PIMCO sold all its Treasuries. Duh--because interest rates are set to rise, and not by a little bit or for a brief span, but by a lot and for years.

That means holders of long-term Treasuries (and other debt) will be cremated as rates rise. (Holders of TIPS will do OK, unless the government fraudulently sets the rate of inflation well below reality. Hmm, isn't that exactly what's it's already doing?)

Once long-term rates have leaped up, then start accumulating the high-yield bonds. Why would rates jump? Supply and demand: as the demand for low-yield Treasuries dries up, the supply keeps rising: every month, the Treasury has to auction tens of billions of dollars of bonds, or even hundreds of billions of dollars. There is no Plan B, the bonds must be sold, and if there are no buyers, then the yield has to rise.

Once rates have been engineered much higher, the Financial Oligarchy accumulates the high yielding bonds.

Here's where "austerity" comes in. Once rates are so high that they're choking the real economy, then voices arise demanding the Federal government stop borrowing and spending so much. Austerity (forced or otherwise) soon reduces the supply of bonds hitting the market and so rates decline, boosting the value of the high-yield debt.

To service the cost of all this Federal borrowing, taxes are raised on what's left of the productive members of society.

To add insult to injury, it will become "patriotic" to "buy bonds."

OK, let's check the setup:

1. Treasury market now dependent on one buyer: check.

2. That buyer stops buying, pushing rates higher: no QE3. Check.

3. "Austerity" is now seen as inevitable--but not just yet: check.

What the true believers of hyperinflation and the destruction of the dollar cannot accept is that debt is an asset to the owner of that debt. In focusing solely on the advantages of inflation to borrowers, they ignore the critical fact that inflation quickly destroys the value of the asset that debt represents to the owner. And debt is a primary asset to pension funds, insurance companies, banks, and indeed the entire financial sector.

So in claiming high inflation is guaranteed, adherents are claiming that the entire financial sector will accept being wiped out, just so Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer won't have to pay interest on the ballooning government debt.

That's exactly backward: the entire point is for Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer to pay high yields on Treasury debt, owned by the Financial sector's Oligarchs. The Con is to stripmine the public coffers, then impose higher rates and "austerity", buy the debt with the cash plundered from the public, and then sit back and enjoy risk-free returns as taxes are raised on the remaining tax donkeys. Inexpensive Bread and Circuses (SNAP food stamps and the political theater of the two parties staging a partisan "fight to the death") will keep the peasantry entertained and complicit.

As I concluded in the first foray into the Con:

    In essence, the financial Elites would own the revenue stream of the Federal government and its taxpayers. Neat con, and the marks will never understand how "saving our financial system" led to their servitude to the very interests they bailed out.

    The circle is now complete: in "saving our financial system," the public borrowed trillions and transferred the money to private Power Elites, who then buy the public debt with the money swindled out of the taxpayer. Then the taxpayers transfer more wealth every year to the Power Elites/Plutocracy in the form of interest on the Treasury debt. The Power Elites will own the debt that was taken on to bail them out of bad private bets: this is the culmination of privatized gains, socialized risk.

    In effect, it's a Third World/colonial scam on a gigantic scale: plunder the public treasury, then buy the debt which was borrowed and transferred to your pockets. You are buying the country with money you borrowed from its taxpayers. No despot could do better.

This is the ultimate endgame of the financialization of the U.S. economy and the concentration of wealth and thus political power in the hands of those who skimmed the immense gains from that financialization.

http://www.oftwominds.com/blogapril11/s ... e4-11.html

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

This explains everything about the acute effects of the current mini-Jew Scam known as QE...on top of the Massive Jew Scam known as the Federal Reserve, BOE, IMF and BIS... ---CSR



 

[mchawe]

If there is no economy, interest on the debt cannot be paid. Increased interest rates adds pressure on any company with debts, sending businesses to the wall. The government becomes a competitor for debt and you have an economic waste land. No business means no taxes. No taxes means default. We have already moved into the area of sovereign risk and default. The exact situation where gold thrives.

To service the cost of all this Federal borrowing, taxes are raised on what's left of the productive members of society.

If there are very few of these, there quickly reaches a point where it is impossible to pay the interest on a huge debt. Result= Default.

and

the entire point is for Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer to pay high yields on Treasury debt, owned by the Financial sector's Oligarchs.

alright in theory but not in practice. High taxes result in business moving off-shore. Result again is an economic wasteland with diminishing tax revenue = Default.

The reality is that the Fed is between a rock and a hard place. It is QE to infinity !

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

More Jew Scam over America...:

Thomson Reuters to Host Economy Panel
By Betsy Rothstein on December 14, 2010 2:20 PM

Panel avalanche continues. This time it's Thomson Reuters' take on "Fixing the World Economy: Stresses and Solutions." Sound intriguing? Read on.

The "Newsmaker" event will be at the Newseum on Dec. 16 from 12 – 1p.m. The panel features Dominique Strauss-Kahn Managing Director, International Monetary Fund.  Chrystia Freeland, Global Editor-at-Large for Reuters, will moderate.  

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/t ... nel_b27015
---------

Capitalism is failing the middle class
Apr 15, 2011 10:37 EDT


Global capitalism isn't working for the American middle class. That isn't a headline from the left-leaning Huffington Post, or a comment on Glenn Beck's right-wing populist blackboard. It is, instead, the conclusion of a rigorous analysis bearing the imprimatur of the U.S. establishment: the paper's lead author is Michael Spence, recipient of the Nobel Prize in economic sciences, and it was published by the Council on Foreign Relations.

Spence and his co-author, Sandile Hlatshwayo, examined the changes in the structure of the U.S. economy, particularly employment trends, over the past 20 years. They found that value added per U.S. worker increased sharply during that period – 21 per cent for the economy as a whole, and 44 per cent in the "tradable" sector, which is geek-speak for those businesses integrated into the global economy. But even as productivity soared, wages and job opportunities stagnated.

The take-away is this: Globalization is making U.S. companies more productive, but the benefits are mostly being enjoyed by the C-suite. The middle class, meanwhile, is struggling to find work, and many of the jobs available are poorly paid.

Here's how Spence and Hlatshwayo put it: "The most educated, who work in the highly compensated jobs of the tradable and non-tradable sectors, have high and rising incomes and interesting and challenging employment opportunities, domestically and abroad. Many of the middle-income group, however, are seeing employment options narrow and incomes stagnate."

Spence is neither a protectionist nor a Luddite. He prominently notes the benefit to consumers of globalization: "Many goods and services are less expensive than they would be if the economy were walled off from the global economy, and the benefits of lower prices are widespread." He also points to the positive impact of globalization on much of what we used to call the Third World, particularly in China and India: "Poverty reduction has been tremendous, and more is yet to come."

Spence's paper should be read alongside the work that David Autor, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has been doing on the impact of the technology revolution on U.S. jobs. In an echo of Spence, Autor finds that technology has had a "polarizing" impact on the U.S. work force – it has made people at the top more productive and better paid and hasn't had much effect on the "hands-on" jobs at the bottom of the labor force. But opportunities and salaries in the middle have been hollowed out.

Taken together, here's the big story Spence and Autor tell about the U.S. and world economies: Globalization and the technology revolution are increasing productivity and prosperity. But those rewards are unevenly shared – they are going to the people at the top in the United States, and enriching emerging economies over all. But the American middle class is losing out.

To Americans in the middle, it may seem surprising that it takes a Nobel laureate and sheaves of economic data to reach this unremarkable conclusion. But the analysis and its impeccable provenance matter, because this basic truth about how the world economy is working today is being ignored by most of the politicians in the United States and denied by many of its leading business people.

Consider a recent breakfast at the Council on Foreign Relations that I moderated. The speaker was Randall Stephenson, chief executive officer of AT&T. Mr. Stephenson enthused that the technology revolution was the most transformative shift in the world economy since the invention of the combustion engine and electrification, leading to a huge increase in "the velocity of commerce" and therefore in productivity.

One of the Council of Foreign Relations members in the audience that morning was Farooq Kathwari, CEO of Ethan Allen, the furniture manufacturer and retailer. Kathwari is a storybook American entrepreneur. He arrived in New York from Kashmir with $37 in his pocket and got his start in the retail trade selling goods sent to him from home by his grandfather.

Here's the question he asked Stephenson: "Over the last 10 years, with the help of technology and other things, we today are doing about the same business with 50 per cent less people. We're talking of jobs. I would just like to get your perspectives on this great technology. How is it going to over all affect the job markets in the next five years?"

Mr. Stephenson said not to worry. "While technology allows companies like yours to do more with less, I don't think that necessarily means that there is less employment opportunities available. It's just a redeployment of those employment opportunities. And those employees you have, my expectation was, with your productivity, their standard of living has actually gotten better."

Spence's work tells us that simply isn't happening. "One possible response to these trends would be to assert that market outcomes, especially efficient ones, always make everyone better off in the long run," he wrote. "That seems clearly incorrect and is supported by neither theory nor experience."

Spence says that as he was doing his research, he was often asked what "market failure" was responsible for these outcomes: Where were the skewed incentives, flawed regulations or missing information that led to this poor result? That question, Spence says, misses the point. "Multinational companies," he said, "are doing exactly what one would expect them to do. The resulting efficiency of the global system is high and rising. So there is no market failure."

This conclusion is a very big deal – Spence is telling us that global capitalism is working the way it should, but that the American middle class is losing out anyway. Since global capitalism is the best way we've come up with so far to run our economy, that creates quite a dilemma.

Spence is honest enough to admit that he has no easy answers. But he has posed the right question. American politicians in both parties are focused on a budget debate that is superficial, premature and ultimately about something pretty easy to figure out. Instead, we should all be working on the much bigger problem of how to make capitalism work for the American middle class.

As the this article states, a rather unremarkable conclusion. India and China have the fastest growing middle class in the world thanks to outsourcing. Another significant problem is the shrinking of skilled labor therefore making us dependent on other countries for manufacturing or whatever. This could pose problems for the US in the event of any disagreements or having be to be self sufficient. Even having advanced degrees does not guarantee you a high paying job unless it is technology related, bio science or other limited specializations. America was built on the middle class embracing the American dream which is saddly not the case anymore.

http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freel ... dle-class/

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

( Idiot J-Tribe B*tch... "we don't want to beat the World Bank up too much..".---Jew Chrystia Freeland)  
Newsmaker

Chrystia Freeland and Felix Salmon on the World Bank and dictatorships
Apr 5, 2011 10:18 EDT


middle east | Newsmaker |    Robert Zoellick    | World Bank

At 2:15 p.m. tomorrow, on Wednesday, April 6, Chrystia Freeland will interview World Bank President Robert Zoellick    in Washington, D.C. In this video, Reuters Financial Blogger Felix Salmon and Reuters Editor-at-Large Chrystia Freeland discuss what they think the World Bank's role should be in the uprisings in the Middle East and in supporting countries run by dictatorships versus helping the poor in undeveloped countries.

http://www.reuters.com/resources_v2/flash/video_embed.swf?videoId=200609083
http://www.reuters.com/resources_v2/fla ... =200609083

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

More Jew Blabbing Scams:

Ask your questions for El-Erian here
Chrystia Freeland    | Mohamed El-Erian | Newsmaker | PIMCO

At our next Thomson Reuters Newsmaker event on Thursday, March 31st, CEO of PIMCO Mohamed El-Erian will be sitting down with Reuters Global Editor-at-Large Chrystia Freeland and speaking about the "Global Economic and Market Outlook."

El-Erian first joined PIMCO in 1999 and carried out a two-year stint as president and CEO of Harvard Management Company before returning to the company in 2007. PIMCO is  the world's largest global and investment management and solutions firm, overseeing investments of more than $1 trillion for clients ranging from public and private pension to retirement plans.

Please submit your questions for Freeland and El-Erian by posting them below in the comments section.

http://blogs.reuters.com/trnewsmaker/ta ... -freeland/

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

L'dor V'dor (Ukrainian Jews -- Probably this J-B*tch had family in the NKVD)

This Jew Friendly book of Jew Murders over Russia-E.Europe mentions the Freelands:

The lesser of two evils: Eastern European Jewry under Soviet rule, 1939-1941
 By Dov Levin

http://books.google.com/books?id=UxZwmrQL_3EC

From Generation to Generation

------------

Freedland ~ Faxstein

Pangborn - Buchman - Schwartz
Mann - Handel

------------

Faxstein ~ Shatzkin  

Handel - Glazier - Weiner

-------------
Milinsky ~ Wolfson

Milan - Milin - Molinsky - Malinsky
Hirshbein - Seidman

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

What did Hitler say in his last days... "That in 70 years the Americans will know the Jew"   or something to that effect...? --CSR


-----------
Lloyd Blankfein. King of Wall Street defiant under siege
 

The usually good-humoured boss of Goldman Sachs, angrily contesting the $1bn fraud case the bank faces, is not used to being on the back foot

    Andrew Clark
 
        The Observer, Sunday 25 April 2010

A postal worker's son raised on a tough estate in a down-at-heel neighbourhood of Brooklyn, the boss of Goldman Sachs has traded his way from a scrappy job as a gold dealer to the top of Wall Street's most powerful bank. But suddenly, in the eyes of Lloyd Blankfein, the US government is trying to destroy him.

In a series of angry, defiant phone calls last week, Blankfein told top clients that a $1bn fraud case brought against Goldman by the Securities and Exchange Commission was politically motivated and would ultimately "hurt America". A generally humorous man with a self-deprecating wit, Blankfein's usual bonhomie has been shelved.

A dimunitive, bald figure who often seems swamped by his grey pinstripe suits, Blankfein, 55, has seen his bank become a lightning rod for outrage over reckless behaviour on Wall Street. The SEC's prosecution, which alleges that Goldman fiddled customers by selling them mortgage derivatives doomed to fail, strikes at the very core of the 141-year-old firm's cherished reputation for financial integrity.

The case has helped the Obama administration get the upper hand in a fight with Republicans in Congress for tougher Wall Street regulation. In a speech attended by Blankfein and other top financiers at New York's Cooper Union college last week, Barack Obama harangued bankers, telling them: "Some on Wall Street forgot that behind every dollar traded or leveraged, there is a family looking to buy a house, pay for an education, open a business or save for retirement."

After politely applauding the president, Blankfein hurried out without a word, surrounded by a supportive posse of senior lieutenants and attendants. Approached by the Observer, he steadfastly refused to acknowledge questions, declining even to offer a "no comment". That's unusual for a man who prides himself on his repartee and his dry wit that has, at times, made Goldman's difficulties worse.

"I know I could slit my wrists and people would cheer," Blankfein quipped to one interviewer last year. That came hot on the heels of an ill-judged joke to another interviewer, intended, his spin doctors insist, to be self-aware irony, that the bank was doing "God's work".

A scholarship boy who made it to Harvard, Blankfein's first Wall Street job was for a gold dealer, J Aron & Co, in 1981. The same year, J Aron was bought by Goldman, kicking off Blankfein's rise, initially trading commodities, then fixed-income debt products and, by 2002, as head of Goldman's entire trading floor. He got the top job at Goldman four years ago when the Bush administration tapped up the bank's previous chief executive, Henry Paulson, to become treasury secretary.

His appointment surprised many at Goldman, who viewed him as a less polished figure than his predecessors at a bank noted for its elaborately courteous loyalty to corporate clients. Insiders say his background in trading is telling; once best known for its financial advisory and deal-making activities, Goldman's trading operation has become paramount under Blankfein's watch.

"He's really smart, he works very hard and he's got a very irreverent sense of humour," says Charles Ellis, author of The Partnership, a recent book on Goldman Sachs. "He's the kind of guy who'll say to you with sincerity, 'I look better on the telephone.' And he's right – he's not a handsome man."

For the first two years of Blankfein's tenure, everything went swimmingly for Goldman. After the bank racked up vast profits of $11.6bn in 2007, Blankfein was awarded a bonus of $68m, making him the highest-paid chief executive on Wall Street and exposing him, seemingly unprepared, to unprecedented scrutiny. Shortly afterwards, the financial crisis began in earnest and Goldman's sure-footedness began to seem malevolently opportunistic. The bank took huge hedging positions, betting that the US property market would plummet and, as millions of Americans faced foreclosure, it ratcheted up profits. When competitors, such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, foundered, Goldman took advantage of cheap credit available from the US Treasury.

Admirers say Blankfein's coal-face experience gives him an edge, allowing him a ready grasp of his bank's risk positioning. A former Goldman partner said: "He's a soldier's soldier. He's been a trader himself and a manager of traders. He somehow knows how to do it."

When asked about his motivation, Blankfein likes to talk of his father, a sorter for the US postal service. On his retirement, Seymour Blankfein's role was filled by a machine. Blankfein junior is said to have been haunted by the spectre of his father working for years at a job that was, in reality, redundant.

He is an unlikely character to play the role of Wall Street demon. For all his personal wealth, Blankfein is far from flash and is more likely to spend his evenings reading history books than waving around a platinum credit card in an upmarket cocktail bar. He has been married since 1983 to a former corporate lawyer, Laura, and the couple have three children. .

One of Goldman's clever ploys to protect its wealth was to take out billions of dollars of swap positions with insurer AIG, guarding itself against default on complex derivatives. When the credit crunch hit, Goldman made vast collateral calls against AIG and was blamed as a key player in the collapse of the insurance empire, which has required $180bn of aid from taxpayers. The Treasury's decision to meet AIG's commitments played into criticism of Goldman's undue influence; in the space of a single week at the height of the crisis, phone records showed that Blankfein spoke to the US treasury secretary 24 times.

Blankfein, who lives in a $26m apartment on the edge of Central Park and has a weekend estate in the Hamptons, has struggled to comprehend the public backlash against his firm's prosperity. To senior Goldman executives, the bank has merely been a canny investor on the financial markets, contributing to "liquidity" with its esoteric derivatives and helping business clients across America to raise funds for investment.

Within the sanctuary of Goldman's brand-new $2.4bn, 43-storey headquarters on West Street in lower Manhattan, public discontent initially mattered little. The Rolling Stone writer Matt Taibbi captured the popular mood in July when he characterised Goldman as a vampire squid "relentlessly jabbing its blood funnel into anything that smells like money". Goldman's flippant response was to point out that vampire squids are harmless to humans.

Finally stirred by the extent of public opprobrium, Blankfein offered a vague apology in November, telling a financial conference that his firm "participated in things that were clearly wrong and have reason to regret". But he has declined to explain exactly what he is sorry for and, in hearings in Washington probing the financial crisis, he has been bombastic in his defence.

The SEC's lawsuit against Goldman, is a stark shift in gear. No longer simply the subject of a whispering campaign, Goldman is facing the most damaging allegation that can be levelled against a bank – that it tricked its own clients. Regulators have accused Goldman of encouraging investors to punt on a shaky package of home loans named Abacus without mentioning that the contents were hand-picked by a hedge fund, Paulson & Co, which had a "short" position betting on default. Within nine months, 99% of the loans in the Abacus deal had been downgraded, leaving Royal Bank of Scotland with an $840m liability.

Richard Bove, an influential US banking analyst, has forecast Blankfein's departure, suggesting that "someone must fall on their sword for the devastating decline in this company's persona". Even the Economist, usually sympathetic to business, has twisted the knife, summing up that Goldman is "greedy until proven guilty". Blankfein seems determined to fight, adamant that the firm is a victim of envy. He will testify before Congress on Tuesday to argue Goldman's case.

He can count on certain allies – the mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, stood up for the bank last week. And Blankfein has, in the past, shown a capacity for putting things in proportion. When a colleague began flagging during a series of marathon meetings in the wake of the demise of Lehman Brothers, the Goldman boss reportedly offered limited sympathy.

"You're getting out of a Mercedes to go to the New York Federal Reserve," said Blankfein. "You're not getting out of a Higgins boat on Omaha beach."

THE LLOYD FILE

Born 1954 in the Bronx, New York. Brought up in the Linden projects, a housing estate in Brooklyn and won a scholarship to Harvard. Blankfein joined a gold dealer, J Aron in 1981 which was purchased by Goldman Sachs shortly afterwards and he has worked at the bank ever since.

He lives in Manhattan with his wife, Laura. The couple have three grown-up children.

Best of times Blankfein was the highest paid Wall Street boss in 2007, earning a bonus of $68m, and he was ranked as the world's 18th most powerful person last year by Forbes magazine.

Worst of times Goldman is being prosecuted by US regulators for fraud and was branded as a "great vampire squid" by one writer.

He says "There was a lot of negligent behaviour and proper bad behaviour that has to be fixed and sorted through. We don't take ourselves out of that."

They say "Lloyd Blankfein and Goldman Sachs have rightfully earned the leading role in the story of all that is wrong with Wall Street." George Goehl, executive director, National People's Action

Warren Buffett '100%' behind Goldman Sachs' chief Lloyd Blankfein

25 April 2010 1:40AM

    Try telling me that Obama & his mini Feb. 10 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama said he doesn't "begrudge" the $17 million bonus awarded to JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon or the $9 million issued to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein, noting that some athletes take home more pay.

    The president, speaking in an interview, said in response to a question that while "17 million is an extraordinary amount of money for Main Street, there are some baseball players who are making more than that and don't get to the World Series either, so I'm shocked by that as well." (Typical babble...)

    "I know both those guys; they are very savvy businessmen, Obama said in the interview yesterday in the Oval Office with Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which will appear on newsstands Friday. I, like most of the American people, don't begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free- market system. "  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2 ... dman-sachs

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

A Trillion Jew Scammed here... a Trillion Jew Scammed there.... and pretty soon you are talking about some boots kicking their asses out of this country and over the moon... -- CSR

ZioDenniger comments on Jew Scams...
----------

Fed "Confidence" Sandbaggers Out Again
 

Sandbagging up around the doors, of course, as the water continues to rise.

What am I referring to?  This:

I remind you that "1" is 0.1%.  So 0.1 is 0.01% interest in the 13-week T-bill, and 0.05 is 0.005%.

0.05, incidentally, is the all-time low on that gauge, hit in the middle of the disaster at the end of 2008.

We're back there this morning.

Why is this related to The Fed and the "sandbaggers" around the door?

Because the water is rising rapidly around The Fed; their credibility on being able to control liquidity effectively and manage to "withdraw" from their extraordinary actions is being directly threatened by the market.

Remember folks, just to pull back to the previous 0.25% short-term interest rates - a "hike" of just one quarter of one percent - The Fed would have to sell off somewhere approaching one trillion from their balance sheet.

The problem with such an action is that while the short end of the curve would move to their "target" the long end would almost-certainly skyrocket, instantaneously destroying what is left of the housing market and severely damaging the ability of the government to sell debt.

I know what the retorts will be - "The Fed can pay interest on reserves."  Well, they're doing that now.  How's that "management" working out when the IRX is in total collapse?  If they wanted to "manage" this process why haven't they "managed" to stop it?

There are two possibilities: Either the market is sussing out extremely serious upcoming events that are on the same scale as the collapse of 2008 or The Fed is about to lose control of the interest rate curve.

I believe  Bernanke's hand    is about to get forced, and when it happens I hope you have your seatbelt fastened securely low across your hips.

You're going to need it.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=185389

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

J-Tribe collectively, in many sectors across the globe, are scamming on this one... --CSR

------------

Is The (Jew'd) SLV Wired To Blow?






In Conspiracy, Government, Humor, Leveraged ETF,    Mary Schapiro   , Open Thread, SEC, Silver, stocks finance on Friday, April 29, 2011 at 8:13 pm

I'm not real big on suspense, so I'll tell you upfront, I think so.  Once again, we may be about to find out what happens when regulators are asleep at the switch.

As of this writing there are 364 million shares of SLV outstanding.  In the past five trading days (April 25 – 29) more than 755 million shares have been traded, and get this, more than 10 million ounces of silver were taken from the trust between the 26th and the 28th, taking available shares with them.  From Stockhouse.com :

Note: Stockhouse.com is the only free website that I know of that accurately tracks the number of ETF shares outstanding and changes (wish I could say the same of my broker).  Enter the ETF ticker with the suffix ".SO"

At what point does trading volume relative to existing shares become unbelievable?

Information on institutional holdings of ETF shares is also hard to find. but according to nasdaq.com, 86 million shares of SLV are held by institutions, but that does not include any holdings reported since April 1, 2011.  And speaking of missing data, does anybody know where China Investment Corp's 13F's  are?  The sovereign wealth giant filed its initial holdings with the SEC on February 5, 2010,   but no additional data has been released.  The SEC requires the form to be filed within 45 days of the quarter's end.

The point is that the SLV has become one of the most heavily traded instruments on our exchanges and there is an all too finite number of shares.  There's at least some evidence that the SECs institutional holdings data is outdated and/or incomplete.   What happens when all the shares are spoken for?  If it hasn't happened already (I suspect it has), it should soon.....

Then what?

Will the SEC suspend sales of the SLV?  Will the SLV start trading at huge premiums to NAV?  Will the SEC even notice?

I don't know about you, but I'm going with "SEC will never notice,"  because they have no mechanism in place to ensure "shares owned" doesn't exceed shares outstanding (remember JEW Mary Schapiro's only qualification to Chair the SEC is her inability to recognize a Ponzi).

Obviously if SLV starts trading at huge premiums, it isn't tracking the price of silver anymore.  It will have a market dynamic unto itself.  Suspending sales until more silver is deposited with the trust  will immediately cause a run on physical silver the likes of which has never been seen before.  The silver exchange on the COMEX will blow up in a matter of minutes, followed shortly thereafter by JP Morgan and the class structure of western civilization.  If you don't know how tight the silver supply is getting, take a peak at this chart from 24HOURGOLD:

Kudos to 24hourgold.com for doing a better job tracking the rapidly vanishing supply of registered silver than the COMEX!!!!  (Hope it's OK I stole a screenshot).



To make matters even worse, SLV trades options.  Lots and lots and lots of options.  So when the shares outstanding are all sold, there will be people with call options, who have bought the right to buy shares of SLV at a given price.  Forcing cash settlement means the SLV no longer can claim to track the price of physical silver, because the purchase of silver by an authorized participant to create the shares to cover the options would have surely moved the price of the metal.

So once again America, ignoring the grim reality of the situation is the only logical course of action.  The SEC knows all too well that that's what porn sites are for.  So unless somebody posts this on Pornhub......

I'm sure that    Tyler Durden's instincts will be proven correct again, when he stated that Blackrock's    Kevin Feldman's    defense of the SLV was a red flag in and of itself.  Blackrock is the sponsor of the SLV, and Kevin urged everyone to read the prospectus.  That was probably not such a good idea.

http://acrossthestreetnet.wordpress.com ... d-to-blow/

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

CBS 60 Minutes- The Second (Talmudic) Mortgage Meltdown Crisis

[youtube:1uwclmo3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00b9Awyf5bQ[/youtube]1uwclmo3]

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

LPS' Mortgage Monitor Report Shows March Foreclosure Starts Increasing 33% as Inventories Reach New All-Time High
 
 
May 02, 2011

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – May 2, 2011 – The March Mortgage Monitor report released by Lender Processing Services, Inc. (NYSE: LPS) shows that foreclosure activity picked up during the month. As of the end of March, foreclosure inventory stood at 2.2 million – an all-time high – while foreclosure starts increased by 33 percent since the end of February. Foreclosure sales increased significantly as well, suggesting that the halt in activity due to various moratoria may be passing.
 
Delinquencies continued to decline in March, dropping by more than 11 percent month-over-month – the lowest level since 2008 – as more delinquent loans either cured or were moved into foreclosure. Delinquencies are down nearly 20 percent since this time last year.

Early-stage delinquencies have led the decline, as fewer problem loans enter the pipeline. In fact, 30-day and 60-day delinquent inventories are now approaching pre-crisis levels. It's important to note the impact of seasonality, as the first quarter of virtually every year shows a drop in new delinquencies, and historically March is consistently the month with the largest declines.
 
The report also found that mortgage origination activity continues to be dampened, primarily due to ongoing reduction in refinance activity. As interest rates rise and credit requirements remain more exacting, the majority of homeowners eligible to refinance may have already done so.

http://www.lpsvcs.com/LPSCorporateInfor ... 10503.aspx

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Another "Typical Jew Scam" for the books...  the Talmudic "ST OMO"  --CSR

-------------

Goldman Sachs Took Biggest Loan From Undisclosed Fed Program
By Bob Ivry and Bradley Keoun -


Goldman Sachs's peak outstanding loans were the second-highest at $34.5 billion on Dec. 31, 2008, when interest rates were at their lowest. Photographer: Jin Lee/Bloomberg

   Goldman Sachs Scooped Up Biggest Federal Loan  
 

July 6 (Bloomberg) -- Bloomberg's Bob Ivry and William Cohan, a Bloomberg contributing editor, talk about Goldman Sachs & Co.'s $15 billion loan from the U.S. Federal Reserve in 2008, the biggest single loan from a little-known lending program whose details have been secret until today. Ivry and Cohan speak with Pimm Fox on Bloomberg Television's "Taking Stock." (William Cohan is a Bloomberg View columnist. The opinions expressed are his own. Source: Bloomberg)

  Lloyd Blankfein  

Goldman Sachs & Co., a unit of the most profitable bank in Wall Street history, took $15 billion from the U.S. Federal Reserve on Dec. 9, 2008, the biggest single loan from a lending program whose details have been secret until today.

Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg

Goldman Sachs Took Biggest Loan From Undisclosed 2008

Goldman Sachs's peak outstanding loans were second-highest at $34.5 billion on Dec. 31, 2008, when interest rates were at their lowest, according to the data. Photographer: Jin Lee/Bloomberg

Goldman Sachs & Co., a unit of the most profitable bank in Wall Street history, took $15 billion from the U.S. Federal Reserve on Dec. 9, 2008, the biggest single loan from a lending program whose details have been secret until today.

The program, which peaked at $80 billion in loans outstanding, was known as the Fed's single-tranche open-market operations, or ST OMO. It made 28-day loans to units of 19 banks between March 7, 2008, and Dec. 30, 2008. Bloomberg reported on ST OMO in May, after the Fed released incomplete records on the program. In response to a subsequent Freedom of Information Act request for details, the central bank disclosed borrower names, amounts borrowed and interest rates.

ST OMO is the last known Fed crisis lending program to have its details made public. The central bank resisted previous FOIA requests on emergency lending for more than two years, disclosing details in March of its oldest loan facility, the discount window, only after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it had to. When Congress mandated the December 2010 release of data on special initiatives the Fed created in its unprecedented $3.5 trillion response to the 2007-2009 collapse in credit markets, ST OMO -- an expansion of a longstanding program -- wasn't included.

"The Fed has come a long way over a long period of time as far as transparency," said Raymond W. Stone, managing director and economist with Stone & McCarthy Research Associates in Princeton, New Jersey. "They thought counterparties might be harmed, but now so much time has passed that the information is not as sensitive anymore."
Primary Dealers

The 19 borrowers from the program are known as primary dealers, which are designated to trade government securities directly with Federal Reserve Bank of New York. They bid at auctions for ST OMO's cash. While the rates they paid generally tracked the federal funds rate, the rate for some dipped as low as 0.01 percent in December 2008.

The New York Fed conducted 44 ST OMO auctions, according to its website. Banks bid the interest rate they were willing to pay for the loans and pledged mortgage-backed securities guaranteed by government-sponsored enterprises such as Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac as collateral for the Fed's cash. The transactions were known as repurchase agreements, or repos.
Longstanding Program

ST OMO was an expansion of longstanding open-market operations, which offered cash for up to two weeks and were used as a tool of monetary policy. In March 2008, the Fed adapted the program to alleviate pressures in short-term credit markets, according to a news release the central bank issued at the time.

The program shouldn't be grouped with the Fed's other crisis lending initiatives because it was "not outside of the Fed's standard authorities," David E. Altig, senior vice president and director of research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, said in his blog in May.

The New York Fed posted aggregate data about the program on its website after each auction, said Jeffrey Smith, a New York Fed spokesman. By increasing the availability of short-term financing when private lenders were under pressure, "this program helped alleviate strains in financial markets and support the flow of credit to U.S. households and businesses," he said. All of the ST OMO loans were repaid.

Some primary dealers used the program to help customers, such as hedge funds, finance their holdings of mortgage-backed securities, Stone said.
MBS Market

"The Fed didn't want to just finance the primary dealers, they wanted the mortgage-backed securities market to become more fluid," Stone said.

Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC, a unit of Switzerland's second-biggest bank, had $45 billion in loans outstanding on Aug. 27, 2008 -- the largest peak borrowing amount, the data show.

"Credit Suisse was a net creditor throughout the crisis and made between $30 and $70 billion of liquidity available to central banks each day," said Victoria Harmon, a spokeswoman for the bank in New York.

Six of the program's top seven borrowers were units of foreign banks, the data show.

Goldman Sachs's peak outstanding loans were the second- highest at $34.5 billion on Dec. 31, 2008, when interest rates were at their lowest, according to the data. Michael DuVally, a spokesman for New York-based Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), the parent company of the primary dealer, declined to comment.
Lehman Brothers

Lehman Brothers Inc. had two loans totaling $2 billion outstanding when its parent investment bank filed the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history on Sept. 15, 2008, the data show. Those loans were repaid on Sept. 18, 2008, under a separate agreement, the Fed's release said. Lehman's peak borrowings from ST OMO reached $18 billion on June 25, 2008, according to the data.

Kimberly Macleod, a Lehman spokeswoman, didn't immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment.

RBS Securities Inc., a unit of Britain's second-biggest bank by market capitalization, had $31.5 billion in loans outstanding on Oct. 8, 2008, and UBS Securities LLC, part of Switzerland's biggest bank, borrowed as much as $20.5 billion on Nov. 26, 2008, the Fed said.

Among the smallest loans was one to Bear Stearns & Co., the primary-dealer unit of Bear Stearns Cos. The primary dealer took one loan from ST OMO for $500 million, on March 12, 2008, according to the release. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) bought the New York-based investment bank four days later. The loan was repaid on April 9, 2008, the data show.

The information on ST OMO is available on the central bank's Web site: http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetaryp ... ranche.htm

To contact the reporters on this story: Bob Ivry in New York at bkeoun@bloomberg.net;

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Gary Putka at dscheer@bloomberg.net;

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-0 ... ogram.html