The "Occupy" Movement, Class Warfare, Bill Maher, Dr. Cornel West & Ron Christie

I just got finished watching the latest Bill Maher show.  Definitely one of his better ones
His last guest was Ron Christie - a black republican ( a former Dick Cheney staffer, but not an elected official).

This individual's biggest point about recent demonstrations was that they are tearing at the fabric of American society.  That we must remain unified as a people and not resort to class warfare.  That democratic ideals of cooperation and compromise must be adhered to.

If the nation didn't exist as it now does, this might sound reasonable.  But it is intellectually insulting to pronounce identifying and addressing the concept of class inequality as a dis-unifying thing when growing class inequality is the status-quo.  When the entire 21st century has been an exercise in allowing the 1% to accumulate accelerating wealth at the expense of everyone else.  It's almost like this gentleman is saying that citizens do not have the right to question the concentration of 70% of the country's wealth in the hands of the top few percent of the population because that's the way it is and should be accepted as such.

I wonder what rights this person thinks that Americans actually do have?  If we can't protest policies that exacerbate the growing rift between the rich and the just-barely-getting-by-if at-all, what is left to protest?  History showed that the Vietnam War was ended largely through the voice of the people.  So just what segment of the population does this guy believe he is speaking for?  Obviously one must make a relatively comfortable living just to be guest on Maher's show in the first place.  Does this black man think that the civil rights movement so vital to his present status was an inappropriate attack on the unifying and just social fabric of American society in place  at that time?

Ron Christie and people of his ilk are dangerous.  When people attack or try to discredit appropriate activism  challenging basic unfairness by pretending to champion democratic values - it is beyond destructive.  It reveals an attempt to rely on constitutional authority to suppress the very ideals so very important to the magnificence of the Constitution itself.  The exact circumstances that the Constitution was promulgated to correct for the new democracy.

I wish Dr. Cornel West and the other guests had not been so quick to shake Christie's hand in gestures of conciliation at the end of the show.  Because the man doesn't deserve it.  His stance on on the state of our country and support of restrictions to any ability to equalize it is the type of thought process that can be found in the collapse of all the empires which faded throughout the course of recorded history.  One cannot defend what is inherently self-destroying from within since its foundation was ill built.

The Truth About Talipes: My Story, Your Story

The Truth About Talipes: My Story, Your Story:

I APOLOGIZE TO ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO MIGHT HAVE ACCESSED THIS BLOG FOR MY USUAL ECONOMIC-RELATED POSTS.  I SIMPLY DON'T KNOW HOW TO SEPARATE THIS ONE ON MY GOOGLE ACCOUNT.  PLEASE IGNORE IT IF UNINTERESTED.  
AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE FOR ITS INCLUSION ON MY BLOG.  I  SIMPLY LACK THE ABILITY  TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SEPARATE IT FROM "ECONORAMA".   I'M SORRY. 

 

Well, as I said earlier - I was an identical twin born with a club left foot. The only way people could distinguish me from my identical twin brother was through my deformity.

This absolutely destroyed my self esteem during adolescence and young adulthood in the 1960s. It may or may not have contributed to my bipolar condition. I most definitely was
impacted by cyclical depression, but experienced no manic phases until my forties. But at the time, I simply didn't realize what the depressive episodes were - they seemed
just part of my life.

I grew up in a supremely athletic, competitive family. I also had an older sister and a younger sister. Both were excellent swimmers. They broke records at our local swim club and had their names on the records plaque above the locker rooms.
Everyone but me were the type who always won the first place ribbons and medals at swim meets.

My parents have told me that the family obsession with competitive swimming actually originated with the decision that swimming would be excellent therapy to maintain flexibility
in my club left foot. That this would help me in life.

Never did they consider the devastating emotional impact it would have. Never. My twin brother was a champion at his events. I would be striving to come in in third place if I
was lucky. I continued swimming until the distance changed from 50 yards (2 laps) to 100 yards (4 laps). My basic performance in freestyle was to be behind after the initial dive into the
water as I couldn't match the distance of others. I would then catch up somewhat towards the end of the first lap. I had a very strong arm stroke, but very poor kicking technique
as I could never properly extend my left foot. At the lap turn, swimmers used what is called "flip turns". My flip turns were a disaster as my feet never coordinated properly to push
off from the wall. So I would again fall behind and try to catch up. Normally I never quite could and ended up in 3rd or 4th place while my brother won.

My swimming coach wanted his team to win at all costs. I remember occasions when there were only two entrants in a the butterfly or backstroke competition. That left the third place
ribbon and points for the team open. My coach would summon me to "get third place for the team". I was terrible at these two styles. I swam the breast stroke and freestyle. But I would
enter as told. Sometimes the opposing coach would size me up and direct another of his own swimmers to enter the event. Now I'm either going to come in third or last. Probably half
the time i came in fourth. So I was humiliated by being forced to swim an event "for the good of the team" only to be embarrassed and get no points. I got out of the water and tried to
keep the tears inside.

So this was a great part of my life from age 10 to about 17 or so.  Not only did I swim competitively in the summer, but also in winter swim clubs (YMCA and otherwise).  I lacked the fortitude and confidence to simply tell my parents that I wanted out.  That this was killing my psyche.   That it was devastating to my self evaluation.

Instead, I was compelled to accompany my brother to continual swimming workouts at a place called "Suburban Swim Club".  This was a facility whose purpose was to mold champions.  Only the best members of my swim club went, along with the best from the area.  So what was I doing there?  I wasn't among the best and never could be.

It was psychological torture.  The coach hated me.  He knew I had no business being there and had less than zero compassion.  It was not in his nature to do otherwise than develop champions.  That was his job.  Not to put up with a swimmer who shouldn't even be there and was holding up progress.

I remember doing laps where we used only our feet to improve our "kicking" for events.  I could not keep up with the others and cheated by also using my hands to not slow practice down.  The coach would actually scream at me for this cheating.  Berate me in front of the others.  I just held back the tears again.

Toward the end of the swim seasons, they would divide championship competitions into top flight swim meets and other meets for the lesser talented ones.  My father would drive my twin brother to the top meets while my mother would take me to mine.  I guess my father didn't have the time or interest to fool around with second rate competitive events.

Oddly enough, what I considered to be one of my very best performances took place at one of these winter swim meets.  I was entered in the breast stroke 50 yard event.  There were a total of six people in my heat - all of whom generally had about the same best times.  So basically we were about even in skill level.

I got an excellent start and pulled away from the field.  I won by a mile and felt great.  I then asked my timekeeper what my time had been thinking it might have been my best ever.  He ignored me and looked away.  I asked again thinking he might not have heard me.  Again I was ignored.  When they gave the results it was announced that I had been disqualified for an "illegal kick".  Even though I had swum breast stroke in this fashion my whole life, the official thought that my left foot kick was illegal and disqualified me from the race.

Hey man, it was just another blow to my self esteem.  I wasn't even mentally strong  enough to get angry.  I just internalized it.  Tried not to think about it.  Just go on.  I'm not even sure my father even cared enough to ask how I did that day.  He was probably bragging about how my twin brother beat one of the top swimmers he had competed against.  I also have never forgotten the reaction of my mother.  On the drive home, she never really addressed it with me.  Almost as though she had to take me to the meet and was reading a book or something instead of watching.

I mean, what's the difference anyway?  The only reason I was swimming was to increase the flexibility in my left foot.  Who cares how I did or how I felt?  It didn't make any difference.  Not one family member cared or understood for one instant about the impact this had on my psychological development.

But I now look at this as a life enriching thing - something that contributes to the quality of one's existence as they age.  Although it nearly destroyed me at the time, ultimately I'm glad it happened as it made me grow as a person.  Life is a strange thing to live through, you know.

Birney K. BrownMoneyloser1@google.com

What Just Happened to Greeks - Watch Very Carefully !

The newly announced 50% haircut to Greek debt holders is a colossal development.  The stock markets have reacted exactly the opposite of the way they should have.  It is unfathomable for markets to rise steeply due to this.  It is an unmitigated disaster with disastrous ramifications.

It must be realized that billions upon billions of Greek debt is held by Greek Pension Funds.  This means that 50% of the asset value of the Greek bond portion of the pension funds has just been wiped out.


Here's an example of what this really means to Greek pensioners and future retirees.  I'll use my own situation as a proxy for a Greek citizen.

I worked for state government for 25 years and am now retired.  Each and every time I got my paycheck I contributed to my state retirement pension fund (as did the system in my behalf).  The fund then invested all the contributions in various assets such as bonds, Treasury's and stocks.  The retirement fund directors pursued returns on assets to meet its payout obligations. 

OK - just to provide a simplified example.  What if my retirement fund held a mixture of investments that included 35% US government debt?  What if, as just occurred in Greece, my pension fund and other state pension funds were forced to take a 50% haircut on the value of the US government debt portion?  It would immediately destroy the integrity of my retirement program.  Each and every retirement system for each and every state would go to crisis mode.  They would all become insolvent overnight!

This exceedingly dangerous "solution" to Greece's sovereign debt crisis is catastrophic.  Citizens in Italy, Spain and other sovereign debt stressed countries had better follow this very, very carefully.  If things unfold resulting in other countries having to apply similar "solutions" - the world financial system will collapse.  Completely fall apart.

No one will be safe.  It will change the world as we know it.  The legacy of worldwide governments will be that their central banks, planners, political bodies and all leaders blew up the world by allowing fraudulent unfree "free markets" and the elite users of weapons of financial destruction to ruin everything.  That the fate of the world was handed over to a group who could not have been more wrongly selected.  Could not have been more untrustworthy.    The group who governments worldwide turned to for answers and guidance - when all they had to offer was destruction while they lived the high life.  I predict when all is said and done, history will record the early 21st century as a period where the world could never adjust to the change from manufacturing-driven economies to financial-driven economies, much of whose resultant products brought no value to society.  A time when the very definition of the term "bank" was perverted beyond recognition.  When civilization caved in and crumbled as a result of continual bowing to the needs and desires of the very, very, very few.

The 12/31/11 end of Unemployment Compensation extensions Legislation

As many know, the federal unemployment extensions legislation is set to expire effective 12/31/11 unless Congress acts.  This will immediately cut off millions of UI recipients in the beginning of 2012, followed by many more millions between the start of the new year and June 9, 2012.

One would think that politicians - as of 10/25/11 - would have announced or at least formulated their positions on this matter.  This reasonable assumption is incorrect.  I contacted the Washington, D.C. offices of my two US Senators and two US Congressmen about this one issue simply to ask their stance on this singular concept.  I was unable to get a direct response to this very simplistically basic question.

Before calling these offices I had a discussion with a representative of the Bureau of Employment and Training  responsible for the weekly reporting of initial unemployment claims.  He was very forthcoming and enthusiastic about his job.  Well spoken and thoughtful about a variety of issues.  He essentially stated that not 100%, but closer to 130% of UI benefits are re-injected into the economy by the multiplier effect.

For example, before speaking to him I had not realized that budget constrained states had agreed to
relax restrictive "insured unemployment" standards to allow the payment of so-called State-Federal Extended Benefits as long as it was 100% federally funded (instead of 50-50).    This EB category generally exists before the federal tier 1 to tier 4 extensions kick in.

My premise before speaking with him was a lingering question about what happens to people who receive a lengthy period of UI benefits and then are fortunate enough to get a new job.  Only to be followed by a layoff or closing by the new employer.  Would they then not be eligible for a new claim due to failure to accumulate enough earnings in their new eligibility period?  ( Normally the first 4 of the last 5 completed calendar quarters).

He confirmed that this could be the case, but that states had created an alternative eligibility period to address this.  Unfortunately, this would often result in a substantially lower weekly benefit amount - perhaps as low as $50 per week from a previous benefit amount around $300 per week.  Hardly enough to live on.

But back to the premise for this piece.  It is beyond my ability to comprehend that about nine weeks prior to the cut-off of extended benefits legislation, politicians are unwilling or unable to articulate their positions on this issue.  This is basic stuff!  I told  the  congressional staff that I spoke with that this is an issue on which my vote is decided since they are subject to two year terms - unlike my Senators who can relax until 2014 and 2016.

In summary - we now have congressmen/and or senators presumably nationwide who have either not yet established or are unwilling to provide their stance on the unemployment extension matter.  A situation which will rear its monstrous head effective 12/31/11.  One which will have a profound impact on our 70% consumer driven economy. 

We are governed by a" last-minute-itis" group of clowns.  Which just goes to show why the Occupy Wall Street/99% demonstrators are the only group who properly perceive our present state.  And further exemplifies why trying to pigeon-hole them into one issue convenience is a mistake promoted by the powers-that-be.

I believe that the OWS group should keep their stance as is.  Because there are far too many issues to compartmentalize in the manner that the corporate-controlled main street media and elite would prefer.

Who Owns The Fed? - Wrong Question

Many people have been frustrated when trying to determine who actually owns the private entity known as the Federal Reserve.  That's because the Fed itself has historically taken pathologically profound steps to ensure against it becoming known.

But if you think about it, perhaps ownership - who the shareholders are - might not be as important as who directs its activities.  In other words, in whose behalf the Fed actually functions.  We hear a lot about the Fed existing to preserve the country's basic banking system and serve the nation by accomplishing its dual mandates.

Consider the relationship between the Fed and the primary dealers.  These bodies basically want the public to believe that primary dealers facilitate the Fed's objectives by acting as trading counterparties of the NY Fed.  That they ensure the Fed's objectives are implemented to achieve desired results.

But what if this is actually ass-backwards?  What if the evolution of the financial industry is such that the Fed now exists to carry out the desires of the banking elite?   The most recent development of the Fed supporting Bank Of America transferring toxic assets from its Merrill Lynch division to the bank holding company supported by customer accounts (despite deserved disagreement from the FDIC) appears to support this thesis.  The FDIC believes the taxpayer should not again act as a backstop for Merrill's gambling habit while the Fed apparently does.  Add this to the $700 billion TARP program, Fed discount window policies and the basic free money with no conditions attached philosophy and it becomes pretty apparent who's running the show.  Also the insane decision to allow such entities as  Goldman Sachs to become bank holding companies in the first place.  Not to even mention exchanging liquid treasuries for "value unknown" pieces of paper (derivatives) or "100 cents on the dollar" decisions.  A never ending arrangement of exchanging solid assets for trash.

A quick review of the NY Fed primary dealers list reveals it is filled to brimming over with TBTF  banks.  While Bank Of America proper is not on it, Merrill is.  And the list does not consist only of American institutions.  Actually BAC could be said to be on it by some kind of convoluted situation involving Merrill and Banc of America.

The primary dealers constantly meet and interact with the Fed.  Interact to the extent that they know before anyone else about forthcoming Fed actions.  Getting this information early allows them to front run every QE implementation and Twist policy.  To allow them to set up their positions and profit from everything others learn about later.  But it gets worse - of late the Fed has even been requesting advice from the TBTFs about moves it is considering.

No, the Federal Reserve does not act to preserve the banking system as a whole - it exists to serve the desires of the primary dealers.  The question of who owns the Fed is not the proper one.  The appropriate question is who controls the Fed and ensures that it acts in their best interests.  The answer to this question is the primary dealers.  And the primary dealers list is synonymous with the list of TBTF banks.

The TBTF banks have actually taken over a private entity which profoundly effects the lives of every American.  This country is very far from a free capitalism democracy with equal opportunity for all.  It has been hijacked by the most greedy, wanton, unpatriotic species known to man.  The .01% that the Occupy Wall Street/99% demonstrators target - but Congress, Presidents, Treasury Secretaries and the Federal Reserve serve.

UPDATE :  The recent audit of the Fed revealing $16 trillion in secret near-zero interest loans to certain banks and biggest corporations does VERY little to dispel the above and much to support it.