American Reality Check

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.

Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

B

benjamen

Yellow Jacket
Messages
1,574
Reaction score
9
Points
0
Location
Migratory
It is bad when even the mainstream news is noticing:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-05-18/federal-deficit-accounting/55179748/1

"By law, the federal government can't tell the truth," says accountant Sheila Weinberg of the Chicago-based Institute for Truth in Accounting.
:rotflmbo:

"Federal debt and retiree commitments equal $561,254 per household. By contrast, an average household owes a combined $116,057 for mortgages, car loans and other debts."
:flushed:
 
Related article:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Colum...rica-Should-Declare-Bankruptcy-Now.aspx#page1

"If the U.S. government were a private company being audited by standard practices, it would be considered much further in the red than official national debt figures show. It would, in fact, be shut down and its key executive prosecuted for fraud. "
:rotflmbo:

"But the $15 trillion actually represents the tip of a very large iceberg. When off-budget and contingent liabilities are factored in, total federal liabilities exceed $100 trillion."
:giveup:
 
They will as soon as they recognize that inflation has gotten that bad.
 
PMBug said:
They will as soon as they recognize that inflation has gotten that bad.
Click to expand...

That is definitely a concern. Giving everyone more money, only de-values it and makes prices go up (which I am guessing is why most people are here) :wave:
 
Amazing that this stuff is showing up in the news in other countries:
http://www.news.com.au/business/mar...r-than-you-think/story-e6frfm30-1226393783077

This is why interest rates will not be allowed to rise:
"If interest rates go up by simply three per cent over the next decade, the additional cost to the Treasury, just for interest payments, would equal the peak combined cost of the wars in both Afghanistan in Iraq,"


"If you look at the interest payments going to foreign countries, soon we're going to be spending enough to essentially finance the Chinese military,"
 
benjamen said:
Amazing that this stuff is showing up in the news in other countries:
http://www.news.com.au/business/mar...r-than-you-think/story-e6frfm30-1226393783077

This is why interest rates will not be allowed to rise:
"If interest rates go up by simply three per cent over the next decade, the additional cost to the Treasury, just for interest payments, would equal the peak combined cost of the wars in both Afghanistan in Iraq,"


"If you look at the interest payments going to foreign countries, soon we're going to be spending enough to essentially finance the Chinese military,"
Click to expand...

We just keep digging the hole deeper.

I am all about helping others out, but we need to fix some of our problems as well.
 
And this is why we are losing the economic battle:
http://www.businessinsider.com/you-cant-engineer-your-way-around-americas-corporate-tax-rate-2012-6

"Big companies make a lot of money in foreign countries, but if they bring the profits back home they get hit with the world’s highest corporate tax rate. So they leave the money in China, for example, and then invest it there in research and development or a new factory. I.e., our own multinational companies are financing the new facilities around the world that are rendering the U.S. uncompetitive.

A new enterprise, meanwhile, would be facing a choice between China, with a 15 percent corporate tax rate, proximity to all kinds of suppliers, and low costs, and the U.S., with a 35 percent tax rate (plus any state corporate income tax) and an ocean separating it from most component vendors."


"[I was a bit skeptical of the message that high costs and taxes explain the U.S. decline. After all, Germany has high costs for everything and Europeans are famous for high tax rates. Yet Germany is wonderfully successful in manufacturing. Then I looked up the corporate tax rate in Germany and it turns out to be 15%, the same as China's.]"
 
I didn't think this kind of article was allowed:
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25z;_ylv=3

"We are living in a modern day depression,"

"This dramatic statement is based on several factors, including the record number of Americans living on Food Stamps — 46 million or 1-in-7 in 2011"

"nearly 30% of mortgage holders under water"

"cites the "real" unemployment rate — currently 14.8% -- and the fact the country is still down 5 million jobs from its 2007 peak."

"Three years into the aftermath of the worst recession since the 1930s, the global economy still cannot manage to expand organically — that is, without the need for ongoing life support from central banks and governments."

:flushed:

Edit: it is interesting that there is no comment section for this article....
 
The effects of taxpayer paid welfare programs:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/stu...llars-spent-welfare-poverty-levels-unaffected

“The vast majority of current programs are focused on making poverty more comfortable … rather than giving people the tools that will help them escape poverty.”
:rotflmbo:

"In fact, the study points out that according to the administration’s own projections, federal welfare spending is unlikely to decline even after the economy recovers – further evidence that not all of the increase in spending is recession-related."
:rotflmbo:

"It would make sense therefore to shift our anti-poverty efforts from government programs that simply provide money or goods and services to those who are living in poverty to efforts to create the condi*tions and incentives that will make it eas*ier for people to escape poverty."
 
We have been living through a depression for three years now. The only thing keeping "Hoovervilles" or mor appropriately, "Obamavillages" from popping up is welfare and food stamps. Period. The largest surge in disability applications in the history of social security has happened over the last 30 monthsw. More people are on food stamps than in our entire history, and the number breaks a new record every month. The number of people falling off the 99 week cliff is the only thing keeping the "official" unemployment number below 17%. I could go on and on.......but I won't.

I will however, state unapologetically, that I am very nearly completely debt free, and if it all crashes and burns tomorrow, I believe myself to be prepared enough top survive a multi-year, protracted climb out of hell.
 
Related article on the war on poverty:
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/co...verty-$15-trillion-and-nothing-to-show-for-it

"Fifteen trillion dollars: That’s how much American taxpayers have forked over in the name of helping the poor since 1964. And what do we have to show for it? A poverty rate that has barely budged, an entrenched bureaucracy, and a population — like that of Greece and Portugal, two welfare-state basket cases — increasingly dependent on government handouts."

“Government spends $20,610 for every poor person in America, or $61,830 per poor family of three,” Tanner reports. “Given that the poverty line for that family is just $18,530, we should have theoretically wiped out poverty in America many times over.”

:popcorn:
 
Those pesky facts blowing holes in the official recovery story:
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/07/june-jobs-swoon-americas-labor-market-depression-continues/

I love the graph showing the promised drops in unemployment when the recovery plan was originally presented compared to what unemployment actually did.

For those that claim that the U.S. economy is recovering, the bottom graph in article clearly shows the percentage of employed adults bottomed out in 2010 and has flatlined ever since.
 
The U.S. has so much money, we are just giving it away:
http://thenewamerican.com/rio-20/item/11987-us-pledges-$20-million-and-counting-for-african-“clean-energy”-projects

"The federal government has done such a bang-up job of picking winners in the “clean energy” field here at home (see, e.g., Solyndra) that it is now planning to spend $20 million of taxpayers’ money on similar projects in Africa — with “hundreds of millions of dollars” to follow, according to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton."

You know, I can not find the section of the constitution that authorizes our government to give money away?
:shrug:
 
If you can not the anti-firearm law passed in the U.S., then do it through the U.N.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...eement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/

"In January 2010 the U.S. joined 152 other countries in endorsing a U.N. Arms Treaty Resolution that will establish a 2012 conference to draft a blueprint for enactment. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pledged to push for Senate ratification.

Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton has cautioned gun owners to take this initiative seriously, stating that the U.N. “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there is no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”
 
Increase in the number of people getting disability outpaces increase in new jobs:
http://news.investors.com/article/6...ility-climbs-faster-than-jobs-under-obama.htm

"The disability ranks have outpaced job growth throughout President Obama's recovery. While the economy has created 2.6 million jobs since June 2009, fully 3.1 million workers signed up for disability benefits."

"The number of long-term unemployed — those out of work 27 weeks or more — is still 5.4 million — almost 1 million higher than when the recovery began, and almost twice the level it ever reached prior to Obama's recovery."

:popcorn:
 
Californians will never learn. The third city in two weeks has filed for bankruptcy for a reason, there simply is no more money. Tax bases have eroded by huge margins and people are fleeing. Productive folks are tired of having these legislators dip in to their wallet to line their pension funds with furs, and now they authorize even more debt for a train to nowhere that will never be completed. Watching the sequence of events in California is like a real time enactment of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.
 
benjamen said:
If you can not the anti-firearm law passed in the U.S., then do it through the U.N.
Click to expand...
...ah, yes, the same modus operandi as over here - when EU member country passess some nonsense bullshit bureaucratic law/regulation, and people start asking questions why, there is that new universal "authority" at hand, that is supposed to serve as an end-all argument (and surprisingly enough, 90% cases, it shuts the opponents up!): "but, but, we have to impose this that law, to be in order with EU directives"

...like, you know, a nonsense stops being a nonsense, if it comes from such "high above", that there's no one to argue with/challenge.

people are sheep...
 
Last edited:
benjamen said:
U.S.A.
We want the national debt paid off
We do not want to pay more in taxes
We do not want less government benefits
The rich are not paying enough taxes, make them pay more

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/raising-taxes-winning-issue-obama-223018677.html

:noevil:
Click to expand...
Funny, because under current monetary system, as it is designed (money=debt & debt=money), it doesn't really matter what a country might do, there WILL be a debt pushed around from one place to another, from one group to another, from public to private, lastly, from one country to another - unless you want to destroy global monetary system. Simply, no debt = no money in the system. When the debt gets paid up, the money gets destroyed. And you can tax people 100%, make them eat thin air and live under the blue sky, and you still won't be able to get rid of the debt, on the global scale - because, after paying all the borrowed capital back (=destroying all the existing money), there will be still interest due, which has never been created (=borrowed into existence).

So speaking about "reducing debts" AND at the same time "reviving the economy" WITHOUT redesigning monetary system from the ground up, is a nonsense, mathematically, and let alone real-world imperfections. And it can only serve as an example, how clueless the public, and their representatives are, in monetary matters.
 
Last edited:
but if you compare the apparent increase in spending with the 'dollar destruction' chart, spending in real terms remains constant :rotflmbo:
 
Let us check off the list of "free" things given away:
Food
Housing
Energy
Cellphones
Cash
Airconditioner

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ent-is-handing-out-free-air-conditioners-too/
http://moneyland.time.com/2012/02/08/how-to-get-the-government-to-cover-your-cell-phone-bills/

If we dare cut government spending, two million jobs will be lost!!
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/report-2m-jobs-lost-automatic-065313310.html
Ignore the fact that the 2 million would all be government job...

Thankfully, the government has a never ending supply of money. Nothing to worry about, move along..

:noevil:
 
Last edited:
Everyone cheer, U.S. M2 is now up to 14 digits!
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/10-trillion-m2-now-rearview-mirror

"Which then begs the question: if and when the US currency in circulation starts picking up, due to conversion of reserves into dollar bills, and if the current ratio of reserves to currency persists, then the conversion of another $1.6 trillion in reserves into currency (since the Fed will be absolutely unable to withhold the reserve avalanche from converting into real circulating money without raising the IOER to a level which would crush the stock market, directly in opposition of what the Fed's prime and only directive is) would mean, all else equal, total bank deposits would rise from the current $8.4 trillion to $21 trillion."

:popcorn:
 
Is is really possible to be "poor", yet have 2+ televisons, air conditioning, cable TV, a DVD player, gaming system such as a Playstation, more living space than an average European, and food?
http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/01/news/economy/poor-income/index.htm?iid=Lead

This line amused me:
"Liberals, however, counter by saying that while electronics and appliances have become more affordable, basic necessities such as child care, health care and transportation have not. These costs have left the poor struggling to make ends meet."

I think this goes to the heart of the U.S. problem. People care more about having the latest gadget than taking personal responsibility of providing their family with food and health care!

$.02
 
Dude, I have no kids of my own, all of those things (toys) you've mentioned. Aside from helping keep the roof over our heads, the vehicles running, and food on the table - not much else in the way of expenses.

And I still don't have much extra fiat at the end of each month. Truthfully, my biggest bill is taxes. I pay more in taxes than I do in any one other department in a year. Food/gas/energy/phone/cable. Any single category, doesn't add up to my tax bill.

Bottom line is, I don't know how people don't get more mad already...
 
benjamen said:
Is is really possible to be "poor", yet have 2+ televisons, air conditioning, cable TV, a DVD player, gaming system such as a Playstation, more living space than an average European, and food?
http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/01/news/economy/poor-income/index.htm?iid=Lead

This line amused me:
"Liberals, however, counter by saying that while electronics and appliances have become more affordable, basic necessities such as child care, health care and transportation have not. These costs have left the poor struggling to make ends meet."

I think this goes to the heart of the U.S. problem. People care more about having the latest gadget than taking personal responsibility of providing their family with food and health care!

$.02
Click to expand...

Don't even get me started on this one. When i see people lined up at the food stamp office, wearing three hundred dollars worth of clothes and shoes, sporting gold chains and an iphone, it makes me want to scream. Our liberal contingent in the USA thinks that this doesn't matter and that we shouldn't add cell phones, cars and clothes to a persons net worth. I say that if these folks can afford 200 dollar name brand tennis shoes, Jordache jeans, an iphone and payments/insurance on a Toyota Camry, then they don't need my help just yet. As cold as it may sound to some, sell the fucking car and take a bus. We have a decent bus line and transit schedule and it costs a buck a trip. You can go as far as eighty miles on a one dollar fare, which is significantly cheaper than a four hundred dollar monthly car payment and another hundred or so for insurance. The gold chains? Sell those too.

I am sick and tired of subsidizing the lives of the perennially lazy and permanent victim class.:judge:
 
Last edited:
Lawmaker actually notices the unemployement rate is complete bull...
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/brea...needs-fixing-rep-duncan-hunter-113437674.html

"The current 8.2% figure you hear about so often is wildly inaccurate and doesn't fairly reflect the true state of the nation's labor force. It's a deficiency that Wall Street-types have long adjusted for with a wink-wink sort of acceptance, knowing full well that the so-called "U-3" headline number is actually a quagmire of exclusions and adjustments that under-reports the real situation by as much as 50%."

I wonder how fast this guy's attempt at being honest gets shot down?
:popcorn:
 
Legislative branch of government turning over more power to the executive brance:
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/co...minating-senate-approval-of-pres-appointments

"By a vote of 261-116, the House of Representatives passed a bill rewriting Article II of the Constitution and divesting the Senate of the power to accept or reject the appointment of many presidential nominees.

Last year, the Senate passed the measure by a vote of 79-20, so it now goes to the desk of President Obama for his signature."

WTF!
:soap:
 
BTW, Article II of the Constitution does allow Congress to do this:
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom