Financial topics

[aedens]

http://www.ceskatelevize.cz/ct24/svet/3 ... celou-noc/

http://www.osce.org/

http://youarenotsosmart.com/

http://www.infoplease.com/biography/irving-kristol.html mugged by reality as mentioned before and

"I can remember way back when a liberal was one who was generous with his own money." - Will Rogers

The current influx vote will keep Johnsons comment accurate unabated as they mask plantation politics.

The reason some Democrats defected is still ignored just as Tragans filling in of Neros 200 acre shovel ready Job site then.

http://followinghadrian.com/2013/08/09/ ... f-hadrian/

This is the footprint the current rhetorical nihilism forecasts seen, follows the characteristic nihilist's rejection of non-rationalized or non-proven assertions; in this case the necessity of the most fundamental social and political structures, such as government, family, and law. Pourous border vote and to covet wage abitrage since the slaves filled Neros 200 acre when Trajan erased his works of the hands.

anom: Within this effort to center the beginning of the civil rights movement in 1964 and LBJ, the Democrat Party would "whitewash" their racist, pro-slavery segregationist, Jim Crow history from the history books and the public narrative. LBJ has been characterized by the Democrat left as the country's second "great emancipator" after Lincoln but nothing could be further from the truth. LBJ's goal, and mission after the assassination of JFK was to regain control of the country's black population for the Democrat Party. He is even quoted as saying as much during various private conversations. MLK was an Eisenhower Republican and he was leading blacks away from FDR-style paternalism towards a policy of self-improvement and self-determination. The American neo-communist left and the Democrat Party could not have this as it would cost them political control of both northern cities and the entire south. This is the foundation of "plantation politics" and it has been fueled by the Democrat Party and the progressive left's ongoing determination to retain control of the country's population by any means necessary. They have to have a open border to survive and the grain colony spoken of. We must bake our own bread.

They will meet the Carpenter soon enough. Like before we will make a private contract so some souls can seek other work on the simple transaction of our daily bread. The petri dish is overflowing indeed since malice and ignorance are never far removed from each other. Only one condition can be cured.

http://gdxforum.com/forum/search.php?ke ... sf=msgonly

Additionally, it was Eisenhower, a Republican, who actually signed the first civil rights bill into law in 1957.

thread context: From 1979 to 1981, he was the executive director of the National Humanities Center, a private research facility in North Carolina. In 1981 President Ronald Reagan appointed him to head the National Endowment for the Humanities, where he served until Reagan appointed him Secretary of Education in 1985. Reagan originally nominated Mel Bradford to the position, but due to Bradford's pro-Confederate views Bennett was appointed in his place. This event was later marked as the watershed in the divergence between paleoconservatives, who backed Bradford, and neoconservatives, led by Irving Kristol, who supported Bennett. It was in 1986 that Bennett switched from the Democratic to the Republican party. Bennett resigned from this post in 1988, and later that year was appointed to the post of Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy by President George H. W. Bush. He was confirmed by the Senate in a 97-2 vote.

The current tone of off your ass is pointless with facts just as Balams ass was the only eyes that could see the peril.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-1 ... earby-town
If that was his intent then he has reference point to start with to the problem in the swamp seen.

http://www.biblenews1.com/balaam/balaam.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voQ2EMeFJng

Debt is the currency of Slaves.

[Higgenbotham]

Big picture items.

JIM RICKARDS:

The Federal Reserve actually, in some ways, already has failed.
I spoke to a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve and I said, "I think the Fed is insolvent."
This Governor first resisted and said, "No, we're not."
But, I pressed her a little bit harder and she said, "Well, maybe."
And, then, I just looked at her and she said, "Well, we are, but it doesn't matter."
In other words, here's a Governor of the Federal Reserve admitting to me, privately, that the Federal Reserve is insolvent, but said, it doesn't matter, because central banks don't need capital.
Well, I'm going to suggest that central banks do need capital.

The Fed has increased its capital; they currently have about $56 billion.
That sounds good.
You say, "gee, $56 billion is a lot of money, that's a pretty good capital base."
But that's not the whole story.
You have to compare the capital to the balance sheet.
How much in the way of assets and liabilities is that amount of capital supporting.

When you look at that it's a much scarier picture, because the actual liabilities, or debt, if you will, on the Fed's books is $4.3 trillion.
So you've got $4.3 trillion sitting on this little skinny capital base of $56 billion.
That's very unstable.
Prior to 2008, the Fed's leverage was about 22 to 1.
Meaning they had $22 in debt on their books for every $1 of capital.
Today, that leverage is 77 to 1.

So, yes, the capital has increased, but the debt and the liability has increased much more.

JOHN MICHAEL GREER:

A human society is an ecosystem. Like any other ecosystem, it depends for its existence on flows of energy, and as with any other ecosystem, the upper limit on its complexity depends ultimately on the difference in concentration between the energy that enters it and the background into which its waste heat disperses. (This last point is a corollary of White’s Law, one of the fundamental principles of human ecology, which holds that a society’s economic development is directly proportional to its consumption of energy per capita.) Until the beginning of the industrial revolution, that upper limit was not much higher than the upper limit of complexity in other ecosystems, since human ecosystems drew most of their energy from the same source as nonhuman ones: sunlight falling on green plants. As human societies figured out how to tap other flows of solar energy—windpower to drive windmills and send ships coursing over the seas, water power to turn mills, and so on—that upper limit crept higher, but not dramatically so.

The discoveries that made it possible to turn fossil fuels into mechanical energy transformed that equation completely. The geological processes that stockpiled half a billion years of sunlight into coal, oil, and natural gas boosted the concentration of the energy inputs available to industrial societies by an almost unimaginable factor, without warming the ambient temperature of the planet more than a few degrees, and the huge differentials in energy concentration that resulted drove an equally unimaginable increase in complexity. Choose any measure of complexity you wish—number of discrete occupational categories, average number of human beings involved in the production, distribution, and consumption of any given good or service, or what have you—and in the wake of the industrial revolution, it soared right off the charts. Thermodynamically, that’s exactly what you’d expect.

The difference in energy concentration between input and output, it bears repeating, defines the upper limit of complexity. Other variables determine whether or not the system in question will achieve that upper limit. In the ecosystems we call human societies, knowledge is one of those other variables. If you have a highly concentrated energy source and don’t yet know how to use it efficiently, your society isn’t going to become as complex as it otherwise could. Over the three centuries of industrialization, as a result, the production of useful knowledge was a winning strategy, since it allowed industrial societies to rise steadily toward the upper limit of complexity defined by the concentration differential. The limit was never reached—the law of diminishing returns saw to that—and so, inevitably, industrial societies ended up believing that knowledge all by itself was capable of increasing the complexity of the human ecosystem. Since there’s no upper limit to knowledge, in turn, that belief system drove what Catton called the cornucopian myth, the delusion that there would always be enough resources if only the stock of knowledge increased quickly enough.

That belief only seemed to work, though, as long as the concentration differential between energy inputs and the background remained very high. Once easily accessible fossil fuels started to become scarce, and more and more energy and other resources had to be invested in the extraction of what remained, problems started to crop up. Tar sands and oil shales in their natural form are not as concentrated an energy source as light sweet crude—once they’re refined, sure, the differences are minimal, but a whole system analysis of energy concentration has to start at the moment each energy source enters the system. Take a cubic yard of tar sand fresh from the pit mine, with the sand still in it, or a cubic yard of oil shale with the oil still trapped in the rock, and you’ve simply got less energy per unit volume than you do if you’ve got a cubic yard of light sweet crude fresh from the well, or even a cubic yard of good permeable sandstone with light sweet crude oozing out of every pore.

It’s an article of faith in contemporary culture that such differences don’t matter, but that’s just another aspect of our cornucopian myth. The energy needed to get the sand out of the tar sands or the oil out of the shale oil has to come from somewhere, and that energy, in turn, is not available for other uses. The result, however you slice it conceptually, is that the upper limit of complexity begins moving down. That sounds abstract, but it adds up to a great deal of very concrete misery, because as already noted, the complexity of a society determines such things as the number of different occupational specialties it can support, the number of employees who are involved in the production and distribution of a given good or service, and so on. There’s a useful phrase for a sustained contraction in the usual measures of complexity in a human ecosystem: “economic depression.”

The economic troubles that are shaking the industrial world more and more often these days, in other words, are symptoms of a disastrous mismatch between the level of complexity that our remaining concentration differential can support, and the level of complexity that our preferred ideologies insist we ought to have. As those two things collide, there’s no question which of them is going to win. Adding to our total stock of knowledge won’t change that result, since knowledge is a necessary condition for economic expansion but not a sufficient one: if the upper limit of complexity set by the laws of thermodynamics drops below the level that your knowledge base would otherwise support, further additions to the knowledge base simply mean that there will be a growing number of things that people know how to do in theory, but that nobody has the resources to do in practice.

Knowledge, in other words, is not a magic wand, a surrogate messiah, or a source of miracles. It can open the way to exploiting energy more efficiently than otherwise, and it can figure out how to use energy resources that were not previously being used at all, but it can’t conjure energy out of thin air. Even if the energy resources are there, for that matter, if other factors prevent them from being used, the knowledge of how they might be used offers no consolation—quite the contrary.

1.gif (39.54 KiB) Viewed 4034 times

The 2007 and 2008 meltdown was based on subprime unraveling. The circled area on the chart above was the result of a few small subprime hedge funds going bankrupt. The subprime crisis then spread into the financial system. The Fukushima disaster was able to be contained. The question is whether Ebola can be contained. If it can't certainly there is nothing the Fed or any government can do. It's interesting to see how the market reacted a handful of subprime funds going bankrupt versus a handful of Ebola cases. Just a few Ebola cases resulted in a more severe panic. It's no wonder because if there is mass hysteria coming over Ebola, schools, factories, office buildings and subways will stand empty and the economy will shut down.

[aedens]

"While 'tekton' is usually said to mean carpenter, it more accurately means master builder.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2015/02/ ... 423772690/

True H http://carecon.org.uk/DPs/0513.pdf

http://gdxforum.com/forum/search.php?ke ... sf=msgonly

More complex than a mouse click still my Brother.

Alt-Capital Influx will meet the quality of the maker whenever as we have seen already here.

The maintenance of capital will be evident when the real issues announce reality in my opinion.

As you noted point blank " As those two things collide, there’s no question which of them is going to win. Adding to our total stock of knowledge won’t change that result, since knowledge is a necessary condition for economic expansion but not a sufficient one: if the upper limit of complexity set by the laws of thermodynamics drops below the level that your knowledge base would otherwise support, further additions to the knowledge base simply mean that there will be a growing number of things that people know how to do in theory, but that nobody has the resources to do in practice."

When they realized it two two weeks to wall paper a room behind the iron curtain and it took two hours here in fact they came to the table ready to discuss facts......

The Fed was buying the curve and the IP for alpha. A hammer cannot build a house.

[Higgenbotham]

http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articl ... ne-capital
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/ ... HC20150210
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-31140987

"We are very, very far from the end of the outbreak," Iza Ciglenecki from Doctors Without Borders told reporters at a science conference Saturday in San Jose, California. She called the ongoing outbreak so unprecedented that "it's like a Hollywood movie."

[John]

Big picture items.

JIM RICKARDS:

The Federal Reserve actually, in some ways, already has failed.
I spoke to a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve and I said, "I think the Fed is insolvent."
This Governor first resisted and said, "No, we're not."
But, I pressed her a little bit harder and she said, "Well, maybe."
And, then, I just looked at her and she said, "Well, we are, but it doesn't matter."
In other words, here's a Governor of the Federal Reserve admitting to me, privately, that the Federal Reserve is insolvent, but said, it doesn't matter, because central banks don't need capital.
Well, I'm going to suggest that central banks do need capital.

The Fed has increased its capital; they currently have about $56 billion.
That sounds good.
You say, "gee, $56 billion is a lot of money, that's a pretty good capital base."
But that's not the whole story.
You have to compare the capital to the balance sheet.
How much in the way of assets and liabilities is that amount of capital supporting.
...

Since the Fed has all sorts of tools for creating money, what difference
does it make if the Fed is insolvent?

[Higgenbotham]

Big picture items.

JIM RICKARDS:

The Federal Reserve actually, in some ways, already has failed.
I spoke to a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve and I said, "I think the Fed is insolvent."
This Governor first resisted and said, "No, we're not."
But, I pressed her a little bit harder and she said, "Well, maybe."
And, then, I just looked at her and she said, "Well, we are, but it doesn't matter."
In other words, here's a Governor of the Federal Reserve admitting to me, privately, that the Federal Reserve is insolvent, but said, it doesn't matter, because central banks don't need capital.
Well, I'm going to suggest that central banks do need capital.

The Fed has increased its capital; they currently have about $56 billion.
That sounds good.
You say, "gee, $56 billion is a lot of money, that's a pretty good capital base."
But that's not the whole story.
You have to compare the capital to the balance sheet.
How much in the way of assets and liabilities is that amount of capital supporting.
...

Since the Fed has all sorts of tools for creating money, what difference
does it make if the Fed is insolvent?

Basically Rickards is saying the Fed is not all powerful and doesn't decide; the market decides. The Fed governor is saying the Fed is all powerful and there can never be any consequence for mismanagement, fraud or abuse because they can dictate to the market (the same thing the Soviets thought they could get away with). The Fed being insolvent is evidence the complexity of the economy is declining due to a reduction in energy concentration. Also, the Fed is powerless to stop the next crisis if it arises from a non-financial cause like Ebola; being solvent would be helpful though because it would help prevent the Fed from being viewed as totally illegitimate when they can't stop the economy from collapsing and there is no sound money on top of it.

The Fed needs to properly manage their balance sheet to ensure there are incentives for the financial system to operate properly. When the Fed has no savings on their balance sheet that mode of operation provides no incentive for saving in the rest of the economy. Everything runs on a shoestring with no buffer unless you've been infused with "free money", then you take it, but there's no incentive to do actual work for it to build a buffer of savings when trillions are dispensed to people who do no work. The Fed is obviously way beyond the point of proper financial operation. In that sense it doesn't matter because nothing can be done to fix it. It's too far gone. Bailing out insolvent banks to make the Fed insolvent was not proper operation and violates the principles upon which Western Civilization was founded and prospered for centuries. It means that all forms of accounting and accountability have become irrelevant and meaningless. Sign up for food stamps and the Fed will print the money. Don't do anything to help yourself; don't grow a garden. It destroys any incentive and basis to be accountable to the civilization and the principles upon which is was founded. The number of food stamp recipients skyrocketed when Bernanke showed the way to moral degeneracy and irresponsibility. That's among the least of the problems Bernanke created but one people can relate to. The worst problems are being fomented by the degenerates he kept at the top of the food chain.

Speaking of the top of the chain, it's like the Catholic clergy saying, "What's the difference that we molest altar boys. We're not doing it, well, OK, we are, but it doesn't matter, and, by God, we have the power to do it. Churches don't need moral capital."

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/03/13/stro ... low-in-us/

With that common attitude, the Catholic church and the Fed have both become illegitimate. The Fed is doing things that are far worse than the Catholic church. The Fed is molesting the population against its will, for now, and they have destroyed this civilization by continuing to subject it to the will of morally and financially bankrupt corporations. They are degenerates and filth of the worst kind.

[aedens]

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/d ... /23303913/

[aedens]

One of the criticisms levied against JFK was that if he were elected, the country would be run by the Vatican.
Who raised that fear? Like I noted Jack would be my vote along with Martin as my Pastor on many topics.
Given the hour we are in between the ears why consider what is put forth.

http://www.bis.org/statistics/gli/glibox_feb15.htm specs will be flushed since the front of the curve is never a mistake.

[Higgenbotham]

The distinction between the Catholic church and the Federal Reserve is that the church didn't lower itself to the point that molesting its membership was its sole function, and it never made official statements that doing so was moral or beneficial. The church continued to have many useful and legitimate functions. The sole function of the Federal Reserve today is to counterfeit money. Some could claim that the Fed has a regulatory role but it really doesn't. It just puts a "Good Housekeeping Stamp of Approval" on whatever the large banks want to do. The Federal Reserve has officially made many statements saying that counterfeiting money is moral and beneficial, such as, "QE creates jobs" when in fact counterfeiting money just shifts the statistics around. Some people benefit and many more don't. The Federal Reserve has also created euphemisms for counterfeiting money, calling it "Quantitative Easing" and other equally bogus terms. The Catholic church never attempted to create similar bogus terms such as "Adolescent Sphincter Easing". Though the Federal Reserve isn't yet defunct, if it were, a comparison to Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia would be more readily apparent. In those regimes, which are now viewed as having served no legitimate function and having no good intent, the leadership used false propaganda similar to what the Federal Reserve uses to justify fraud and abuse.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/ ... 1B20140305

It is propagandized as legitimate while the average peasant actually works 8 years or more for that money.

The reason he gets $250,000 for a 40 minute speech is because he might have some insights as to when and how the Fed will counterfeit money. That's all he has to offer that is worth paying money for. The article says he will shop a book around to publishers without mentioning that it is illegitimate for him to be cashing in on public service and that there are plenty of places on the Internet where he can publish his book for free.

[Higgenbotham]

With those cautions, here’s a narrative sketch of the kind of future that waits for us.

*************************
The second wave of crisis began with the Ebola pandemic, which emerged in West Africa early in 2014. Efforts to control the outbreak in its early phases were ineffective and hopelessly underfunded. By the early months of 2015, the first cases appeared in India, Egypt, and the Caribbean, and from there the pandemic spread to much of the world. In August 2015 a vaccine passed its clinical trials, but scaling up production and distribution of the vaccine to get in front of a fast-spreading pandemic took time, and it was early 2018 before the pandemic was finally under control everywhere in the world. By then 1.6 billion people had died of the disease, and another 210 million had died as a result of the collapse of food distribution and health care across large areas of the Third World.

The struggle against Ebola was complicated by the global economic depression that got under way in 2015 as the “fracking” boom imploded and travel and tourist industries collapsed in the face of the pandemic. Financial markets were stabilized by vast infusions of government debt, as they had been in the wake of the 2008 crash, but the real economy of goods and services was not so easily manipulated; joblessness soared, tax revenues plunged, and a dozen nations defaulted on their debts. Politicians insisted, as they had done for the past decade, that giving more handouts to the rich would restore prosperity; their failure to take any constructive action set the stage for the next act in the tragedy.

http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/ ... fairy.html

I think something like this is approximately what awaits. It could be any pandemic. But if a pandemic hits with this kind of impact, I would expect the casualties related to the collapse of the infrastructure to be higher than the direct deaths from the pandemic, maybe something on the order of another 3 billion within 3 years. Gerald had posted about the hidden people we depend on. There are many. Nuclear power plant operators, drilling rig operators, water treatment plant operators, and so on.

I think this type of thing is something that is not on many people's radar:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/ ... 83191.html

Secondary disease outbreaks could become a fact of life if operator expertise is lost or treatment plants have to be shut down and people have to access highly contaminated surface water. The outbreak was attributed to the intake pipe for the water treatment plant being too close to the wastewater plant discharge and the article says the intake was moved 4200 feet further out into the lake. We are dependent on industrial water treatment processes is what I mean to say. I doubt that has been the case to this extent in the past. The water from another 4200 feet out has to be pumped in and it takes a reliably functioning energy infrastructure to do it. With the water being pumped in from that far out, the diagram shows coal and sand filtration to be sufficient for this case. The way I understand this is nowadays the crytosporidium filtration is done with synthetic membranes more and more. Those membranes have a useful life of a few years and it takes advanced polymerization processes to produce them. They are produced by a handful of companies like Pall and GE. The synthetic membranes are needed due to the contaminated nature of the intake water as they are more efficent at removing pathogens than sand filtration and the other methods used exclusively in the past.

http://www.waterworld.com/articles/prin ... rcity.html

These are the kinds of scenarios that spur communities to consider DPR, because they have few other options, said Guy Carpenter, PE, vice president of the Water Resources & Reuse Group at Carollo Engineers in Phoenix. "The main driver for the use of wastewater treatment plant effluent as a drinking water supply is water scarcity," Carpenter said. "For some communities in the United States, reclaimed water is the only supply of water they have or can access to meet demands, including for drinking water."

Here they have to use the synthetic membranes.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion ... 648285.php

Ingesting wastewater

A recent study by the University of Arizona showed several drinking-water treatment plants in the U.S. get their influent from water sources that, under low-flow conditions, consist of 100-percent wastewater from upstream cities. In other words, the wastewater discharges from one city are not diluted at all by clean "natural" water when the next city takes it for their drinking water source.

Even under average-flow conditions, some drinking-water plants use water containing more than 20 percent wastewater. Of the 11 drinking-water plant intakes in the U.S. with the highest percentage of such de facto reuse, eight are in Texas. So, many Texans are now, probably unknown to them, ingesting water that was recently municipal wastewater. Yes, natural processes in those rivers help clean the water, but those processes are generally slow, so the natural cleanup is minimal when the travel time between cities is only days.

The bottom line of all this being that if the infrastructure collapses due to a pandemic secondary deaths from disease could be higher than from the pandemic itself.