USA - Presidential Elections

AMERICA HILLARY 2016 HELL NO Robby Mook heading Hillary Clinton presidential campaign 35-yo exp. political campaigner *muzzling Bill Clinton will be a priority* Surprise, Surprise: exploiting gay rights as centerpiece campaign /point of difference, for gay vote http://www.ibtimes.com/hillary-clinton-gay-vote-lgbt-activists-embrace-historic-2016-presidential-campaign-1879647 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ America’s libertarian freakshow: Inside the free-market fetish of Rand Paul & Ted Cruz Next year's GOP primary is shaping up to be a great one for small-government zealots. Here's what's at stake Conor Lynch [...] So how has our economy become this monstrous fusion of government and business? Paul and Cruz go after the usual enemy — the state. Libertarians believe that it is the government — which just can’t mind its own business — that caused crony-capitalism. If only the government got its hands out of the private industries, then a purer form of capitalist harmony would emerge. The idea of lemonade-stand capitalism suits their ideology perfectly — but it is a myth. In reality, the more “free” a market becomes, the more the competition gets rigged. In a capitalist system, the main goal is to grow and accumulate indefinitely. Competition is an effective way to drive innovation and efficiency in theory. But as businesses grow into large corporations and gain larger shares of the market, smaller producers can no longer compete, and must either work for the competition or exit the industry. We see this dynamic at work in the dominance of companies like Walmart and Amazon, who have managed to stack the deck overwhelmingly in their own favor and drive innumerable smaller competitors out of business. One thing about capitalism that free-market libertarians do not seem to understand is that it represents a constantly evolving social system. This also means that theories must also keep up with reality, and not reside in past centuries. In today’s world, corporations rule, and in America, as regulations have become laxer over the past few decades, they have grown even larger, especially in the finance industry, where the biggest corporations began merging after the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act into the too-big-to-fail behemoth’s that persist even today. The problems become even more pronounced when you consider the power available to the world’s largest companies. After the Citizens United ruling, which both Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have defended, corporations can contribute unlimited funds to political action committees. Enter the Koch brothers, who are planning to spend about $900 million on the 2016 election. The game is rigged, there is no doubt about it, and crony-capitalism exists — but it is not a perversion of “pure capitalism,” it is simply a natural evolution of it. Capitalists do not care about theory, as libertarians do; they care about getting ahead and increasing profit. Tilting the scales in one’s favor is simply an expedient way to achieve said profits. Competition on a level playing field isn’t a feature in such a system, but a bug, and one that’s increasingly been pushed to the margins. So the solution provided by libertarian leaning individuals like Paul and Cruz is based on this false notion of what capitalism actually is. They say that government is always the problem, and that it is the states fault for the crony-capitalism of today. But it is not the state who has corrupted the corporations, but the corporations who have corrupted the state. Getting rid of regulations and privatizing everything, as libertarians propose, would not create a pure form of capitalism where everyone has a fair shot — it would create a dystopia of abusive and uncaring corporations without any accountability to the public. The true answer to fighting the crony capitalism of today is to attack the nexus of corporations and their government sponsors. And Citizens United, contrary to what Cruz and Paul seem to believe, is one of the clearest examples. When politicians depend on millions upon millions of corporate campaign dollars, one cannot honestly expect them to be on the side of the common people. The game is rigged. If a politician attempts to do their job and refuses to court the wealthy and corporations, they will most likely cease to be a politician in the next election. This is especially true for presidential politics, where campaign spending has skyrocketed. During the 2008 election, eight donors gave more than $1 million to outside groups, like Super PACs. Fours short years later, and two years after the court decision, this number shot up to 126 for the 2012 election. The only way to truly fight crony capitalism is to stop the madness, and limit campaign spending, or more preferably make campaigns publicly financed. Get private money out of politics, and create a level playing field, where politicians can honestly say what they believe without having to worry about campaign donations. [...]    *EXTRACS ONLY* - FULL @ SOURCE http://www.salon.com/2015/04/14/americas_libertarian_freakshow_inside_the_free_market_fetish_of_rand_paul_ted_cruz/ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ COMMENT Watching the US election campaign could be very interesting.  Not sure I have it in me.  It's a massive amount of information. Enjoyed this guy's Salon article.  Don't know that reining in campaign contributions by the wealthy is the solution to America's problems.  But it would be a help, I guess.  The real solution would be a socialist system.  No chance in the home of the greedy few, exploiting the many. Not much interesting going on in the news, or maybe I'm having a news OD and just not that interested?

Four Horsemen - Documentary - Part 1

FOUR HORSEMEN - DOCUMENTARY NOTES - To:  44:22 Ruling elites seek to maintain power by controlling the 'cognitive map' / what we think. What matters is what is left undebated.  1971 USA off Gold Standard adopted: fiat = So Be It  {Latin} $, £ + € = govt fiat >only govt has power to issue fiat currency >Banks 'create' it thru lending Fiat money = currency that derives its value from government regulation or law. Adoption of fiat currency = greatest growth of supply of money in HISTORY. Who benefits: 1>those that issue $$ (govt) 2>banks 3>Also benefit: >companies & individuals who get this money early b/c spend it prior increase in prices by $$ in circulation inflated prices = increase gains for asset holders (real estate or shares) - WITHOUT improvements > 'speculative bubble' Fiat currency system just redistributes money from the BOTTOM to the TOP (the monied elite). Gulf b/w rich & poor widens. Fiat currency system + fractional-reserve banking system = compounding DEBT faster than you can produce to support debt = DEBT SLAVERY Result: > for every $1 of GDP in #USA, create something like $5.50 debt Of all the money in the WORLD today, 97% of it is DEBT!!!!!!!!!!  America has existed on the assumption that resources can be expanded. But resources limited. Cannot expand pie (like you could in early American history); must divide pie.  America not prepared. Last 40 years, capitalism has taken an extreme form. Goes back to economist Milton Friedman (Chicago School), Ronald Reagan, Thatcher etc. encouraged: >HUGE amounts of debt >privatisation >smaller 'govt' >bigger military (so bigger spending) >deregulation (esp. corporations = Gods) Milton Friedman (Chicago School) neo-classical approach beat the classical approach to economics & became framework for today's capitalism. Classical = favours less govt interference, more personal autonomy & recognition that cannot function w/out natural resources neo-classical = >dismissive of natural resources >govt to rule economy & solve social probs >free market to distribute wealth neo-classical school emerged about 100 years ago, due to vested interests desire to protect assets neo-classical mathematical models & assumptions divorced from reality vs classical models, based on what actually *is* Neo-classical models of economics, championed by Reagan & Thatcher, have been used to legitimise financialisation of the global economy. 1932 aftermath of stockmarket crash Glass–Steagall Act protection intro'd to separate ordinary high street banking from investment banking. Glass–Steagall Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Legislation 1999 Clinton repealed Glass–Steagall Act Banks could take ordinary depositors money & speculate on it = 'casino' Unfettered banker gambling resulting from 1999 Glass–Steagall Act repeal pushed global financial system to near collapse. Banks with balances & debt obligations larger than GDP of entire countries, banks had become too big to fail. West unprepared for financial meltdown. Govts reeling. Banks: you have to bail us out. What are you to do with tens of millions of ppl who have lost everything in bank accounts. Bank to govt: cautions you'll have revolution on your hands.  Urged:  borrow money. Create it out of nothing & give it back to us. $700-b needed from US Congress. 2008 banking crisis exposed Western economic system divided as: >socialism for the rich (ie govt bailing banks ...( & therefore obligating the taxpayer to pay off this borrowing to bail out banks)) & >capitalism for the poor. Taxpayer paying 4 misplaced speculation of bankers = economy not serving human = human in perpetual service 2 amoral financial organisations. $8.5 trillion bail-out. Post 9-11 Federal Reserve Head, Alan Greenspan slashed interest rates to encourage lending / bankers needed cash flowing into global pyramid scheme Newly created money entered housing market, creating unprecedented inflation. Huge home loans. Double-income a necessity. #USA Banks got together to exploit minorities /charge more for loans. Wells Fargo targeted urban minorities. Predatory lending. *Not about race; it's about PROFIT. #USA Lobbyists for banking industry amount to x5 per Congress-person, to persuade them to pass legislation favourable to financial industry. Democracy = uneven playing field: the devastated poor cannot afford lobbying equal to that of the banking industry. Ideological control, the cornerstone of Washington-Wall Street corridor: >finance good >more finance better >unregulated finance is best Q. Who controls Washington? > Lehman Bros collapse - 80% population against bail-out > Notwithstanding, Congress passed bail-out A. Banking. Not good reflection on democracy when a group of companies says 'our interests are more important than national interests'. How can corporations control Washington in a democracy? >Campaign contributions >Lobbying >American political structure = flawed democracy Fed Reserve to regulate Wall Street but ... >Wall Street has veto over who is head of Fed Reserve  >Regulators are from banking industry itself As long as this stands, this is not regulation. It is *deregulation* (but called 'regulation', using Orwellian doublethink) Democracy is 'government by the people' Plutocracy is 'government by the rich' Equal voting rights movement early 20thC abolished system where rich have more votes than poor, but lobbying negates that. Lobbying has reduced American political system to mere clearing house for the concerns of the rich. Goldman Sachs machine = >use profits to buy influence in WA >to change laws / easier to make money on Wall Street >use to buy influence WA Famous for claiming it did God's work, Goldman Sachs = one of most influential investment banks in world.  Golden sachs alumni often occupy positions of great influence in governments and central banks. 2008, 1mth prior collapse, Goldman changed GS status from investment to commercial (meaning eliglble for state protection). = socialism for the rich Riding the 'big short' (selling soured securities) in 2008, Goldman Sachs made BILLIONS of dollars & they're back BIGGER & RICHER. ***  Don't think I really know what a 'big short' is. Short selling & collecting insurance might not be the whole story? *** Short selling explained: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shortselling.asp   Money also made on insurance; so it's a WIN, WIN, WIN, WIN etc http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/24/goldman-sachs-emails-big-short_n_550547.html LINK TO DOCUMENTARY: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5fbvquHSPJU#t=319 COMMENT Other (non-banking) example lobbying: *********  Sheldon Adelson & wife spent around $70 million in 2012 trying to defeat #Obama. http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/02/cory_booker_biggest_democratic_recipient_of_pro-is.html  *********  While the world was in financial meltdown in 2008, I barely noticed.  It just didn't interest me. Watching this documentary has been a catch-up for me. Got through only about three-quarters of a hour, so I'll have to make the time to watch the rest while it's still fresh in my mind. The link to the political lobbying article above (Senator Corey Booker, Democrat with the biggest pro-Israel donation -- that mentioned $70-million spent by the Adelsons in effort to prevent Obama gaining the Presidential seat -- was just a random article that was topical today.  But it's a good fit on the subject matter of democracy, money and lobbying (even though it is outside of the banking subject). Was blown away by the amount of money the Adelsons spent. The term 'big short' isn't clear to me.  All I know is there's money to be made from lending and selling and insuring (I think).  And no matter what, it's a win-win for the banker ... especially if when it all goes belly-up, the banker is covered by a government bail-out. An article I read yesterday fits in with this capitalism gone rogue theme: The Root of all Evil "The world's richest person (Bill Gates) has a personal wealth of $78.7 billion. This is higher than the (nominal) GDP of 130 countries ..." LINK:  http://99998271.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-root-of-all-evil.html?spref=tw The details about how much the wealthy few have compared to the rest of the world are sobering. Will revisit the article and have another read, as it takes me a while to absorb information. Looked at a heap of other odds and ends, but I think this is it in relation to capitalism, currency and banking. ***** Just did a quick edit, as the lobbying link I'd placed in the documentary summary could maybe have been confused for having appeared in the documentary (it didn't).  Anyway, it's been shifted to avoid confusion. SUMMARY - PART 2 - HERE.