Is Capitalism or is Socialism increasing?

Shelby wrote:"fix" title chain = bank bailout

Well I know how this one will work out. Again the banksters have outsmarted us. The economy will rollover because of this, then the govt will have to buy out the mess and regulate the fix. The banks will get their bailout #2. Wash, rinse, repeat the cycle of raping the globe.

anonymous insider wrote:So somewhere between the REMICs and MERS, the chain of title was broken.

To repeat: if the chain of title of the note is broken, then the borrower no longer owes any money on the loan.

alarm bells started going off when the title insurance companies started to refuse to insure the titles.

This is a major, major crisis. The Lehman bankruptcy could be a spring rain compared to this hurricane. And if this isn't handled right...and handled right quick, in the next couple of weeks at the outside...this crisis could also spell the end of the mortgage business altogether. Of banking altogether. Hell, of civil society. What do you think happens in a country when the citizens realize they don't need to pay their debts?

Mauldin wrote:Let's be very clear. If we cannot securitize mortgages, there is no mortgage market. We cannot go back to where lenders warehoused the notes. It would take a decade to build that infrastructure. In the meantime, housing prices are devastated. Whatever wealth effect remains from housing gets worse, and the economy rolls over.

Some think we need some regulatory fixes. Some think we will need a legislative cure. But if we need to, there need be no finger pointing, no partisan BS. This needs to get solved.

Someone took out a mortgage. Some entity thinks they are owed money. Fix the damn paper trail so that happens, whether in a legal if time-consuming manner, in a regulatory fix, or with legislation.

Shelby wrote:Nadeem wrote:
"Though at least we retain freedom of speech and the secret police are not out bumping people off that the state does not agree with."

This is primarily due to the technology of camera and video inside everyone's pocket, and the internet to distribute it virally to millions of viewers.

This is why the NWO will ultimately fail, but the problem is on those issues that the masses don't understand well and masses can be easily manipulated to think in terms of what the banksters want. For example Rick supporting tariffs and Nadeem thinking money is fiat, and others who think insurance is a good thing, all those misunderstandings cause the masses to fall deeper into the NWO direction:

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article23862.html#comment95941

some poor woman in Sweden who's had her twin daughters taken away by the child protection busybodies. The children were taken – without notice – from their school, and the woman didn't even know it was an official abduction until she got a letter a week later. The real horror of it is that there isn't actually any evidence of wrongdoing on the woman's part. The law is preemptive and protective – the bureaucrats are authorized to remove children from their families if there might be danger to them. No due process, and forget about "innocent until proven guilty." The breathtaking assumption is that it's better to rip children out of their families than to find out if there's a real problem first. This could only hold sway in a place where the culture is one of great confidence in the wisdom and benevolence of the state.

Doug: Scandinavia is on a slippery slope. I wouldn't be surprised if a very nasty "black swan" the size of a pterodactyl landed there. The U.S. isn't far behind. Big Brother is coming out of the cellar, where he's been chained up, in the U.S. And I'm afraid he's so strong and nasty that few people will be able to pay him enough to leave them alone.

There have long been local pockets of notorious corruption in the U.S., of course: building inspectors, people like that. On a national level, the DEA became very corrupt early on – a natural consequence of "regulating" an industry that runs on billions in cash.

Other federal agencies are more subtly corrupt. Generals are paid off by being hired by defense contractors after they're mustered out.

The problem is when the wealthy use their wealth to prevent competition, i.e. read Wikileaks about how the US govt conspired with Monsanto to force GMO seeds on Europe via trade war threats. Or Bill Gates and Warren Buffet's activities in Africa to spread GMO there.

The best way to fight back is for the common people to buy silver and bankrupt the fiat system that these globalists are using to destroy the world. Silver is their Achilles heel. Gold is good, but silver is a metaphorical bullet. I do not advocate violence. If only 1% of the middle class sold their houses, rent, and buy silver, the globalists would be impotent and destroyed. Come on people, what are you waiting for? Instead you want to waste your time in the black hole of politics. Actions speak louder than words. Silveraction.

P.S. be prepared for silver fiat price correction this year.

Jim,

http://cryptogon.com/?p=706



Gold will set the international "exchange rate" between the absurb, inflating fiat currencies. The IMF may already already preparing for this. I think perhaps the SDRs (special drawing rights) may be backed with Gold given to IMF by member countries (mostly from USA I think).

The point is that at the end, the failure of the regional currencies will be used to reach a one-world"666" currency, where gold will be so valuable, that you dare not hold it, else you will be beheaded.

So the next step is to move to 3 regional currencies, with gold as the exchange mechanism, so we can reload another hyperinflation cycle with expanding global trade.

Then when the pan-Asian currency reaches the current state of dollar debt, then cabal will have destroyed all resistance, and they can move to one-world "666" true social order.

Asian currencies are not officially backed with gold, but asians don't trust their governments and they prefer to hold hard assets than fiat. So the cabal must first get Asia to integrate into the modern fiat regime, before they go for one world currency.

There are still too many people living in rural areas, who store some hard assets (e.g. gold, corn, wheat, etc) as their savings. There are still too many semi-independent people in the world, so the cabal can not move too fast towards total fiat system. They have to allow gold to go way up in value, suck the world in, then exhale again with super high interest rates, build up world trade, then run the Asian debt bubble to it's end. This won't happen in this cycle.

This current cycle is about killing the dollar with debt, sucking in as much as possible in 3rd world, then move to gold international exchange, towards 3 regional currency regimes. So the Asian currency regime will gain in prominence against the dollar. But that currency does not exist yet. The yuan will have to be combined to make something bigger before it is re-valued extensively. Gold will be necessary to get that done and accepted by all the Asian countries.

Only God can save us from the final 666 currency. But that is not what this cycle is about, although I do think we will see many horrible things in this cycle, as we did in the last global inflection point cycle from early 1900s to 1944.

@Adrian Smith:
Some view competition as a zero-sum game, but if that were true then why do the poor (even in the slums of Brazil) of the 21st century have in many aspects a more prosperous life than kings of yore. Unequal distribution creates demand, and demand drives technology. This blog was about a new media technology (social information targeting) that can accelerate demographic-specific relevancy of information.

Axiom: those who want to protect the weak by forcing uniform distribution of anything, implicitly adopt a zero-sum game (collectivism) and ultimately destroy the very thing they think they are trying to help. This is the Iron Law of Political Economics. For example in the Gibson raid, the 2009 Lacy Act was created to appease domestic wood industry, but that surety now makes every citizen a potential criminal (unintended side-effect orders-of-magnitude worse than the intended "benefit"). (my other interpretation is it is another evidence of the dying industrial age)

Corollary: be wary of those wolves in sheepskin bearing "gifts" of collective surety, which is in reality the appropriation other people's resources (i.e. stealing from the collective future).

Cheap energy, largely.

Energy doesn't happen without technology, and technology is driven by demand.

If everyone was rich, but since rich is a relative quality, no one would be rich. If everything was a single color, then nothing would be that color, because we couldn't see anything.

Thus, knowledge can't exist if there is no diversity, because there is nothing that can change. The world would have to become static, for there to be sustainable uniform distributions. Corollary is that for the world to be static, perfection would be possible, which means the asymptotically infinite cost of 100% coverage of any phenomena would not exist in nature, which disagrees with every science I know of, e.g. evolutionary theory, etc..

Annealing (see "simulated annealing") is in the abstract, a generic probabilistic global optimization. It requires many orthogonal experiments and failures in order to not get stuck in a local minima or maxima of the N-dimensional solution space. It is contrasted against for example gradient methods (e.g. Newton's method), which find local but not global minima or maxima. Generally speaking one does not know what the solution space of a problem is a priori, thus a mathematically closed strategy is not available, and afaik annealing is the only possible global optimization strategy. Esr may want to correct me, if I am overreaching in my conclusion.

Warren Buffet interview on Charlie Rose yesterday

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11845

This could have gone in the Inflation vs. Deflation thread. He explains his politics, and he also explains his economic outlook.

He thinks the chance of double-dip is negligible, except if:

1. EU contagion spreads to USA.
2. USA public loses confidence in the govt.

He doesn't seem to think that running a deficit that is 10% of GDP could be making the economy worse (negative marginal-utility-of-debt). He sees that his businesses are expanding, except for those in the housing sector and he thinks we are working off the excess inventory with new household formation.

I think he is missing a key point. For a significant percentage of Americans, their skills are not competitive in global marketplace unless we lower their wages. I think that is why he sees housing construction starts as a key metric, because that industry can employ many of these low skilled people.

And here is the big point Buffet is missing:

http://grandfather-economic-report.com/state_local.htm#spending



And that doesn't include regulatory compliance (which is increasing radically now under Obama), and the mandatory health care system which is not really private. I would suppose the above chart also doesn't include Fannie and Freddie, which are pseudo-government agencies (feds backstop them), and now the government owns General Motors too, I wonder if that is in the above chart? And then the Fed seems to own another $1 trillion or so of the country's businesses on its balance sheet. And then there is the actuarial size of the government (which is off the charts), which is what is being accrued based on future promises. You see we pay for all these things through the depreciation of the currency.

So Buffet does not have a very good handle on the fact of why the capitalism of America is being bleed to death.

Maybe soon we will approach Eurozone Rigor Mortise if we are not already there:

http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2008/03/government-spending-as-percentage-of.html

Government in USA is 75+% of the economy

Hello Michael,

Thank you so much for the reply.

1. Most of the posts on goldwetrust.forumotion.com are mine. I used to own GoldWeTrust.com (but no more). I have written extensively on numerous financial sites, and jot down my developing thoughts there at that informal forum. I am mainly a software programmer (and little bit of a mathematician and self-taught economist). I am currently working on a decentralization solution from the technical side (a radically new computer language named Copute.com). I've pretty much given up on educating people, because even those who say they want to end the current problem (i.e. Ron Paul supporters), want to do it from the center. This means they don't really want to decentralize (they are playing right into the status quo and eventual NWO), they want the leaders to do it for them. You may disagree with me. Or you may prefer a purely data-centric exposition and I am in support of your effort in that regard.

2. Agreed % of national income is a more meaningful relative measure. I had visited your site many times over the years (before you got your own domain), and just recently read that you knew Dr. Milton Friedman.

3. If I come across any useful data that I think you might not have, I will email it to you.

4. So just guesstimating, as of 2010 government spending (and mandated spending) could be roughly 67% of national income, and that is not including mandated spending of Obamacare, the Fed's ownership of income producing assets (i.e. the spending is going into the Fed), the accrual accounting of long-term entitlement spending, and probably doesn't include government nationalization (ownership) of most real estate via Freddie&Fannie, General Motors, etc..

So to put it bluntly, the government is probably responsible for more then 3/4 (75%) of the economy.

I think your 50% chart does not make the point strong enough, and the correlation of that probability is spread out across too many pages, and people may not interpret how close we are to the fascist tipping point where we are so close to government being 100% of the economy, that the system eats itself. Typically what happens is the society will use eugenics (rationing, etc) as it tries to rid itself of its fat, e.g. Hilter's Germany believe it or not, was really about the Utopian health care system and the desire to purge the "misfits" ("who were causing all the economic problems"). This delusion creeps in when the government reaches too large of a share of the economy (and no one wants to blame themselves, i.e. fuzzy centralized "solutions", e.g. Ron Paul). The only solution is for the individuals to come out of the system and decentralize. There is no longer any way to fix the system from the center. It is a mathematical fact of entropy and thermodynamics.

> Hello Shelby,
> Thanks for writing. You are to be complimented on your thrust.
> I viewed your URL you sent containing one of my graphics, and read most of
> the comments of others RE Buffet. I found many very good, and in some
> cases spot-on - - revealing some sharp people involved with thinking caps
> on.
>
> From my visit to your site GoldWeTrust.com I gathered you are its
> moderator. Although I'm unfamiliar with that, perhaps you might fill me in
> on its makeup, objectives, etc. - - since I found you appear to be leading
> valuable discussions on important subjects.
>
> You asked savvy a question.
> Regarding your 'about Buffet', I will not comment on what Buffet says on
> that subject or his motivation. Certainly, like most and which is natural,
> Buffet has his own agendas and self-interest, which is his right.
>
> In my own thoughts, I prefer data and data trends over rhetoric-only, in
> my work try to display said data on various critical subjects and then
> provoke the reader to form own views based on said data or present
> reliable data to the contrary.
>
> Hoping its helpful to you, I will take some time with my morning coffee to
> provide some response to your questions. Since I'm unsure how much of my
> works, the Grandfather Economic Report series, you have explored, other
> that part from which you copied your graphic of govt. spending ratios,
> below I will try to anticipate what might be pertinent to your questions
> from my own work - - point you various places and hope its helpful.
>
> Regarding your question as to what might be missing from the govt.
> spending numbers in my graphic, allow me first to state the numbers which
> comprise Federal and state&local spending in that graphic for 2010:
> $3.8 trillion federal govt. spending - 32% nat income
> $2.1 trillion state/local govt. spending - 18% nat income
> Sum = $5.9 trillion
>
> [said data are direct from appendix tables of latest annual Executive
> Branch's Economic Report to Congress]
> (Keep in mind the graphic states said spending as a percent national
> income, not of GDP. If related to GDP, which my late mentor Noble Laureate
> Dr. Milton Friedman advised me against for reasons you will find elsewhere
> in my work, the ratios would be somewhat lower).
>
> I will attach a few graphics to this email to enable you, if you wish, to
> review quicker later.
>
> Attached is a historic progression graphic ('Expanded Govt. Spending Share
> of Economy') of said govt. spending ratio data as shown in the chapter
> Govt. Spending
> Report, being the 3rd graphic on that page. It tells quite a dramatic
> story, over time, reaching all-time highs lately. You might also find
> helpful info from several graphics in the 2 chapters: Govt. Growth Report
> and the Federal Govt. Spending Report [a 2-web page report]
>
> Now to your quest for info RE what is not included in my graphic you
> displayed in your
> https://goldwetrust.forumotion.com/t9p540-inflation-or-deflation under the
> Buffet section.
>
> 1. Regulations - Add $2 trillion > Let's first respond to your point on
> regulations, where you said > 'And that doesn't include regulatory
> compliance (which is increasing radically now under Obama).'
> Again, I offer you some info, in case you have not yet found, from another
> of my chapters, called The Regulation Compliance Cost Report [a 3-web page
> report] You might scan a few graphics there and note said regulatory
> compliance costs (of course) are not included in reported govt. spending
> data because no attempt is made to collect, report and budget.
> From that chapter you will note my estimate (and this chapter says just
> that, my estimate from studies found and there referenced) is that fed +
> state/local govt regulatory compliance costs passed on to the private
> sector exceeds $2 trillion (another 17+% of the economy's nat income) - -
> which one should add to the above stated $5.9 trillion spending, thereby
> expanding the share of the economy impacted by govt all levels.
> (Shelby - let me here ask you, which in that chapter I ask all readers, to
> please let me know if in your endeavors you find more relevant studies on
> this subject than referenced and reported in that chapter, as such
> unfortunately are few and far between).
> Attached to this email is one of the graphics from that chapter ('Free
> Private Sector with spending & regulations 2010 vs 1947).
>
> 2. You mentioned possibly the mandated healthcare add-on. I have no data
> yet on that add-on, but if it is upheld such will be a huge biggie
> addition. So far I have not found (to me) creditable data as to what it
> might cost the private sector - - which, unfortunately, is typical of all
> govt. regulations issued - - as I cover in the regulation report chapter.
> While on this HealthCare subject, you might find the time to scan another
> chapter, called The HealthCare Report, which soon will be further updated,
> time permitting.
>
> 3. In your web report also you said, 'I would suppose the above chart also
> doesn't include Fannie and Freddie, which are pseudo-government agencies
> (feds backstop them), and now the government owns General Motors too, I
> wonder if that is in the above chart?'
> Very good points, Shelby. Although I do not have proof with hard data
> backup, until I do have such it would be savvy to assume such is NOT
> included. One simply needs to say > 'show me the data.'
>
> 4. Another biggie, of course, is that unlike most private sector
> accounting govt. does NOT accrue for future expenses - - such as Social
> Security, Medicare, Medicaid, government pensions and health care
> insurance federal and state/local. These are huge. I try to quantify some
> of such liabilities in a simple chapter you might find interesting, called
> Debt Summary Table. Additionally, for sure, spending does not incl.
> on-going and needed accruals for losses in GM, or in AIG, or in the TBTF
> banks, and on and on.
>
> 5. In general, you are correct that not all govt. spending is captured in
> published data. Therefore, reported governmental impacts certainly are not
> over-stated, rather under-stated.
> Just as companies, individuals, and governments oh so often love to
> over-state asset values - - for sure they NEVER overstate debt values and
> more often than not purposely understate their debts.
> Thus - - when we put together a 3-web page extensive chapter about debt,
> called America's Total Debt Report, such reports debts revealed, therefore
> understating all debt.
>
> Just in case it stimulates, I include two other graphics of major trends
> used by PTB to date to prop up things >
> trend US dollar internationally (from chapter called Foreign Exchange
> Report ) and trend dollar internally (from chapter called Inflation
> Report). Note the similar, long-term trends.
>
> There can be little doubt America, and much of the developed west, have
> extended and pretended so long by debt and trade deficits and government
> growth and currency depreciation that limits are now rapidly on top of us
> - - producing a huge runaway threat to my children's and grandchildren's
> generation.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Let me stop here.
> You are invited to explore more of the Grandfather Economic Report series.
>
> I hope above is responsive and useful.
> I encourage you to continue your probing.
> When you have a chance let me hear about your takeaway and possible uses.
>
> very best regards,
>
> Michael Hodges
> Grandfather Economic Report
> http://grandfather-economic-report.com/
>
> Each generation hopes their children and
> grandchildren will have more security,
> education quality and economic opportunity.
>
> Certain trends threaten their future -
> compared to the past. Here's the proof.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From www.jsmineset.com:

“Unlike the standard Western doom-and-gloom analysis of the African condition, China and India hold the view that Africa is a dynamic continent on the threshold of a development take off, with unlimited business opportunities that would serve Chinese, Indian and African interests,” according to Fantu Cheru, research director of the Nordic Africa Institute.



http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/china-india-beating-u-s-in-race-for-africa/