Archive

Looting the treasury

By Ron Paul

Statement on H.R.4133 – United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, May 9, 2012

 

Mr. Speaker: I rise in opposition to HR 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act, which unfortunately is another piece of one-sided and counter-productive foreign policy legislation. This bill’s real intent seems to be more saber-rattling against Iran and Syria, and it undermines US diplomatic efforts by making clear that the US is not an honest broker seeking peace for the Middle East.

The bill calls for the United States to significantly increase our provision of sophisticated weaponry to Israel, and states that it is to be US policy to “help Israel preserve its qualitative military edge” in the region.

While I absolutely believe that Israel – and any other nation — should be free to determine for itself what is necessary for its national security, I do not believe that those decisions should be underwritten by US taxpayers and backed up by the US military.

This bill states that it is the policy of the United States to “reaffirm the enduring commitment of the United States to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.” However, according to our Constitution the policy of the United States government should be to protect the security of the United States, not to guarantee the religious, ethnic, or cultural composition of a foreign country. In fact, our own Constitution prohibits the establishment of any particular religion in the US.

More than 20 years after the reason for NATO’s existence – the Warsaw Pact – has disappeared, this legislation seeks to find a new mission for that anachronistic alliance: the defense of Israel. Calling for “an expanded role for Israel within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), including an enhanced presence at NATO headquarters and exercises,” it reads like a dream for interventionists and the military industrial complex. As I have said many times, NATO should be disbanded not expanded.

This bill will not help the United States, it will not help Israel, and it will not help the Middle East. It will implicitly authorize much more US interventionism in the region at a time when we cannot afford the foreign commitments we already have. It more likely will lead to war against Syria, Iran, or both. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

by Michael Snyder


 

 

 

 

 

 

You are not going to believe how much money is being spent on our former presidents.  At a time when U.S. government spending is wildly out of control, a total of 3.6 million dollars is being used to support the lavish lifestyles of former presidents such as George W. Bush and Bill Clinton in 2012.  For 2013, the plan is to increase that amount to 3.7 million dollars.  But do any of them really need this kind of welfare?  The truth is that all of them are very wealthy.  So what justification is there for giving them so much money?  You can see the GSA budget proposal for former presidents for 2013 right here.  The 3.7 million dollars for 2013 does not even include the cost of Secret Service protection.  Rather, it only covers expenses such as office rentals, travel, phone bills, postage, printing and pension benefits.  Certainly it is not unreasonable to grant former presidents a small pension, but should we be showering them with millions of dollars each year?  At a time when the federal government is drowning in so much debt, the fact that these former presidents are willing to take such huge amounts of taxpayer money really does make them look like parasites.

So why are these former presidents getting this money?

Congress passed The Former Presidents Act of 1958 because they didn’t want other presidents to end up as poor as Harry Truman did.

Well, these days former presidents are definitely not in danger of ending up poor.  But this law does enable former presidents to stick the U.S. taxpayer with some absolutely outrageous bills.

For example, George W. Bush is scheduled to get $1,356,000 from U.S. taxpayers in 2013.

$85,000 of that will be for phone expenses.

He must have a really, really bad calling plan.

Bill Clinton is scheduled to get $1,019,000 from U.S. taxpayers in 2013.

A whopping $442,000 of that will be for office space.

That breaks down to more than $36,000 a month.

I hope that office space is nice.

Perhaps he needs a lot of office space to hide from Hillary.

George H.W. Bush is scheduled to get $879,000 from U.S. taxpayers in 2013.

$63,000 of that total will be going toward “equipment”.

How many iPads does he really need?

Even the old peanut farmer, Jimmy Carter, will be getting $518,000 from U.S. taxpayers in 2013.

But do they even need this money?

Exactly how wealthy are these former presidents?

Well, it turns out that they are very, very wealthy.

Bill Clinton earned an estimated $41 million in speaking fees during the first six years after he left office.  He also received a $12 million advance for for his memoir, “My Life”.

George W. Bush earned an estimated $15 million in speaking fees during just the first two years after he left office.

So why are we spending millions to support these guys?

Perhaps this is yet another question that we don’t have an answer to.  We can add it to the list….

-Why do chimps throw poop?

The federal government has spent $592,527 to try to find the answer.

-Do unhappy people spend more time on Twitter or on Facebook?

The federal government has spent $198,000 in an attempt to get an answer.

-How do rats respond to jazz music when they are high on cocaine?

Your tax dollars are being spent to get to the bottom of it.

-Does cocaine cause Japanese quail to engage in sexually risky behavior?

The federal government has spent $175,587 to find out the truth.

Right now there are more than 100 million working age Americans that do not have jobs, and this is the kind of nonsense that the federal government is spending money on.

Shame on these former presidents for taking this money.

If our Congress critters are looking for a place to cut the federal budget, this would be a good place to start.

When Moron “Speaker of the House” Boehner last invited the criminal-nazi Netanyahu to address the U.S. Congress, the cowards and FOOLS in the U.S. Congress sprang up and down, wildly applauding this monster, just as with the meetings in which Joeseph Stalin spoke at the U.N.
America is doomed.

By William A. Cook

“Men use thought only to justify their injustices, and speech only to conceal their thoughts.”
(Voltaire: Dialogue XIV, Le Chapon et la Poularde)

February 06, 2012  Voltaire’s wit often illuminates truth. Consider this revealing “thought” as expressed recently in Alert, the voice of AIPAC to its membership: “Some Americans believe if the Israelis strike Iran, the U.S. will pay the political costs anyway, so it would be better for the Americans to do the job and do it properly. Their clock is a bit different from the one the Israelis hear. Because of their vastly superior firepower, the Americans could strike Iran later, more devastatingly and more sustainably.” How just is it for AIPAC’s mouthpiece to declare that America should “devastate” Iran because it has “vastly more firepower” than Israel and could “do a better job” and “do it properly,” as though this were a clean-up “job” of a waste dump and not an illegal invasion of a member country of the United Nations that has done nothing under international law to threaten the U.S. much less attack it, while the Israeli government and its IDF look on happily content that it is American boys and girls suffering the consequences of the unwarranted attacks and not Jewish boys and girls? Has it come to this, that unnamed Israeli spokespeople, voicing AIPAC’s policies, determine what nation the U.S. should invade without consultation with the representatives of the American people?

Not that this sentiment has not been expressed before. Netanyahu told Piers Morgan the same thing in an interview last year, as I have quoted in previous articles, noting Israel’s Zionist government’s desire to use America’s military as their own claiming that what is good for Israel is good for America. That protestation completes the wit contained in Voltaire’s quote: because Israel is America’s only friend in the mid-east, and the only Democracy, and the only nation in that part of the world aligned with the west, it alone deserves America’s “unquestionable” and “unbreakable” support.

Speech that conceals fails to mention that being Israel’s “only friend” has made the U.S. a pariah among nations in the world and made its touted “Democratic freedoms” a laughing stock as the other nations in the UN watch America “support” the Zionists’ agenda to attack Iraq and Lebanon and Gaza, abort international law as it, like Israel, commits extrajudicial executions in foreign states, equips Israel when it invades its neighbors to the north and attacks peace activists aboard vessels from peaceful nations including Turkey, and, ironically sits silently by as Israel dismantles what little of a democracy existed in that nation by creating new laws that deny full citizenship to anyone not a Jew. Thus have we become a nation supportive of a militaristic Theocracy while we continue to mouth the principle of separation of church and state, a principle founded on tolerance, concealing the truth that there are more than 20 great religions with well over a billion people who accept no religion (Adherents.com) all of whom deserve recognition and, as necessary, support from America.

Clearly Israel’s needs are not America’s needs if we mean by that more war in the mid-east. Have we pulled our troops from Iraq just to move them into Iran? Does any sensible person believe that the Iranians have a “need” or desire to attack the people of the United States? Our forces completely surround Iran. We are the nation with atomic weaponry, not Iran. What possible good would Iran achieve by having a nuclear weapon? Hasn’t Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Agreement while Israel, who damns Iran for its nuclear “ambitions,” has an arsenal of nuclear bombs and has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Agreement. Which of these nations is to be feared? Iran has never attacked a neighbor; Israel attacks and occupies its neighbors at will.

Have the Iranians reason to fear control of the U.S. military by Israeli operatives using this nation as its power because Israel wants to devastate Iran the way Iraq has been devastated? Yes. Israel’s ultimate goal is control of the mid-east by surgically cutting it into small indefensible sections that can be dominated by Israeli money and American forces. It would appear, however, that Israel fears America does not desire to follow Israel’s advice to “take out” Iran the way they convinced the Bush administration to “take out” Saddam Hussein. Hence the constant barrage that characterizes Iran as a warlike state set on wiping Israel off the map and becoming the dominant power in the mid-east.

It’s time, I believe, for the U.S. and the UN to consider how to avoid yet more devastation in the mid-east, not by expanding military operations there but by seeking peace through negotiations and cooperative support for the people of the mid-east. Both Israel and the United States must confront the reality on the ground today that they no longer have control over the people of the mid-east, and recognize the colonial drives that Zionism had designed for Israel are no longer tenable.

While Israeli control of America in the form of Las Vegas billionaires buying the presidency continues in the United States, and Republican candidates crawl to the altar of Mammon to remove Obama, who has already sold his soul to the forces of Evil, the people of the world look on in disbelief, having witnessed for sixty years the dominance of Zionist deceit, treachery, and manipulation of America as it savaged the mid-east in the name of friendship, democracy and shared values. But now, they have moved to take control of their own lives as they watch Israel corrode from within as it metamorphoses into a tribalistic, superstitious people further isolating themselves from the community of nations.

Can they not see that the people in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and, arguably, in Yemen and Saudi Arabia have had enough of dictators imposed by the U.S. and Israel to control their governments; can they not see that Turkey broke with the Zionist forces that demanded compliance with their rule regardless of international law and due respect for neighboring nations; are they blind to the Jordanian efforts to take seriously their role as a Palestinian neighbor; do they not see that the people of Egypt have made possible the opening of Israel’s illegal siege of Gaza, that the people of the world have given notice that they will not cease to break that siege with boats entering Gaza through international waters, that the Iraqi people have made clear that they will not cave in to America’s continued control of their country by proxy power, that the peoples of Britain, the United States, Canada, and Australia have openly condemned Israel’s injustices to the Palestinian people regardless of their governments paid presidents and prime ministers that claim otherwise; have they stood by blind to the French Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee issuing its recent report condemning Israel’s apartheid practices against Palestinians in the West Bank, blind to Secretary Ban’s clear call to Israel that it must withdraw from the occupied territories, blind to the European Union as it issued its recent report critical of the Israeli government’s on-going occupation and settlement of Palestinian land, blind as well as Russia, China, Iran and numerous other mid-east nations put into practice what they have agreed upon by resorting to other currencies than the dollar to be the international means of finance; unable to see that once the people of the world have had an opportunity to view the critically acclaimed, dramatically powerful, passionately presented film, The Promise, by director Peter Kosminsky of the United Kingdom, where the inhumane policies of the Zionist criminals erupts in all its unguarded ferocity, the veil of respectability will be removed from Israelis’ atrocities for all, and blind, totally blind to the United Nations as it acts upon a resolution to recognize the rights of the Palestinian people to a state of their own, must they not see, both Israel and its people, as well as all Americans, that they must accept the reality that no single nation can force its will on all other nations with impunity; that time is over.

Clearly Israel’s militaristic approach to neighborliness does not work. Israel fears “delegitimization,” it fears boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS), and it fears total isolation from the world’s communities. Should the U.S. become financially incapacitated through the devaluing of its currency, should it not be able to create adequate jobs for its citizens, should its investment in Israel estimated at $8.2 million per day for a population that is approximately 7 million impair its stability, should the people of America awaken to the control AIPAC has over their President and representatives and the total disregard of America’s security as a result, then Israel could lose both the American veto that has protected it from world condemnation of its policies and America’s military support for its aggressiveness against its neighbors. That would leave Israel isolated, wrapped in fear, and psychologically unstable. Israel’s alternative can only be constant instability, never ending terror and war, hatred by their neighbors, innate, simmering self-hate, and mental anguish resulting from exclusionism that leaves open wounds of distrust and self-questioning, a state terribly close to insanity.

Is it not time for Israel to seek peace with its neighbors? Since no sensible person in the mid-east believes that the U.S. can act credibly as a broker for peace, Israel must seek other partners from the UN who can serve that purpose. It must be willing to accept as a premise for peace, justice as defined by the UN’s International Courts and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It must understand that the occupied territories must be returned to their native inhabitants, that the Partition Plan of November 1947 must be a basis for negotiations if only to provide a foundation for equitable land for both peoples. Modification of land distribution could follow as well as a means of providing for the rights of those displaced in the Nakba. The world peace body could serve to protect both peoples as generations come and go until a free movement of all is possible. Then perhaps we could say, men use thoughts to find justice and speech to communicate it.

William A. Cook is a Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California. His works include Psalms for the 21st Century, Mellon Poetry Press, Tracking Deception: Bush Mid-East Policy, The Rape of Palestine, The Chronicles of Nefaria, and most recently in 2010, The Plight of the Palestinians. He can be reached at wcook@laverne.edu or www.drwilliamacook.com.

 


The US Senate included a measure to restore full funding for foreign aid to the budget it approved late Thursday, increasing chances that the pool of money including assistance for Israel wouldn’t be cut.

The $3.5 trillion document passed by the Senate includes a $4 billion boost to the foreign operations appropriation, bringing it up to the $53.8b. sought by President Barack Obama.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Massachusetts), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and co-sponsor of the amendment, defended the move as important to advancing moderation in the Middle East.

“The reality is that we are just not doing enough today to invest in the vital components of both diplomacy and development,” Kerry said on the Senate floor, referencing his recent trip to Israel, Egypt, Syria and other regional countries. “I saw firsthand the degree to which people we support in many ways are struggling to push back against enormous spending by Iran and other actors who seek to destabilize the region.”

The US House of Representatives, however, only approved $48.5b. for international assistance in its version of the Fiscal Year 2010 budget earlier this week, so the differences will have to be addressed in conference between the two committees, negotiations of which are expected to pick up in earnest when Congress returns from its recess later in the month.

The Senate move makes it much more likely Obama’s foreign aid request will be fully funded. In the event that it isn’t, it is yet to be determined which foreign aid programs would be affected, meaning Israel could still receive the total $2.77b. it is due under a long-term agreement worked out under the Bush administration.

Also on Capitol Hill on Thursday, a coalition of rabbis and Jewish community activists were joined by members of Congress at the presentation of a petition with thousands of signatures calling for comprehensive immigration reform.

The petition urges the government to take legislative action rather than conduct wide-scale raids on illegal immigrants, a practice that began to occur with increasing frequency once former president George W. Bush’s attempt at overhauling immigration policy failed with no resolution on how to handle the millions of foreigners without work permits in America. The Obama administration has been reviewing the issue ahead of unveiling a new policy on the contentious subject.

A gathering of rabbis representing Judaism’s four major branches as well as Jewish immigration activists, including the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, one of America’s oldest immigrant aid groups, was in Washington to present the petitions, signed by 3,600 people, ahead of Pessah.

Rabbi Morris Allen of the Conservative Beth Jacob Congregation in Minneapolis-Saint Paul linked their effort, dubbed “Progress by Passover,” to the tenets of the holiday at the Thursday event.

“Our liberation [from Egypt] did not lead us to self-pride or gloating or forgetfulness of our roots,” Allen said. “Rather we internalized the message of never forgetting those on the margins – those new migrant workers, those new people in need of liberation.”

The coalition was welcomed by two Jewish members of Congress, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Illinois) and Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-New York), who said they would urge immigration reform that would act humanely toward the 12 million undocumented workers in America.


The US Senate included a measure to restore full funding for foreign aid to the budget it approved late Thursday, increasing chances that the pool of money including assistance for Israel wouldn’t be cut.

The $3.5 trillion document passed by the Senate includes a $4 billion boost to the foreign operations appropriation, bringing it up to the $53.8b. sought by President Barack Obama.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Massachusetts), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and co-sponsor of the amendment, defended the move as important to advancing moderation in the Middle East.

“The reality is that we are just not doing enough today to invest in the vital components of both diplomacy and development,” Kerry said on the Senate floor, referencing his recent trip to Israel, Egypt, Syria and other regional countries. “I saw firsthand the degree to which people we support in many ways are struggling to push back against enormous spending by Iran and other actors who seek to destabilize the region.”

The US House of Representatives, however, only approved $48.5b. for international assistance in its version of the Fiscal Year 2010 budget earlier this week, so the differences will have to be addressed in conference between the two committees, negotiations of which are expected to pick up in earnest when Congress returns from its recess later in the month.

The Senate move makes it much more likely Obama’s foreign aid request will be fully funded. In the event that it isn’t, it is yet to be determined which foreign aid programs would be affected, meaning Israel could still receive the total $2.77b. it is due under a long-term agreement worked out under the Bush administration.

Also on Capitol Hill on Thursday, a coalition of rabbis and Jewish community activists were joined by members of Congress at the presentation of a petition with thousands of signatures calling for comprehensive immigration reform.

The petition urges the government to take legislative action rather than conduct wide-scale raids on illegal immigrants, a practice that began to occur with increasing frequency once former president George W. Bush’s attempt at overhauling immigration policy failed with no resolution on how to handle the millions of foreigners without work permits in America. The Obama administration has been reviewing the issue ahead of unveiling a new policy on the contentious subject.

A gathering of rabbis representing Judaism’s four major branches as well as Jewish immigration activists, including the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, one of America’s oldest immigrant aid groups, was in Washington to present the petitions, signed by 3,600 people, ahead of Pessah.

Rabbi Morris Allen of the Conservative Beth Jacob Congregation in Minneapolis-Saint Paul linked their effort, dubbed “Progress by Passover,” to the tenets of the holiday at the Thursday event.

“Our liberation [from Egypt] did not lead us to self-pride or gloating or forgetfulness of our roots,” Allen said. “Rather we internalized the message of never forgetting those on the margins – those new migrant workers, those new people in need of liberation.”

The coalition was welcomed by two Jewish members of Congress, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Illinois) and Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-New York), who said they would urge immigration reform that would act humanely toward the 12 million undocumented workers in America.

U.S. munitions delivered to Israel

2 April 2009

A massive consignment of U.S. munitions was delivered to Israel in recent weeks, according to information revealed by Amnesty International. The organization received information that the Wehr Elbe, a German cargo ship, chartered and controlled by U.S. Military Sealift Command, docked and unloaded its cargo of reportedly over 300 containers at the Israeli port of Ashdod, just 40km north of Gaza by road on 22 March.

The German ship left the USA for Israel on 20 December, one week before the start of Israeli attacks on Gaza. It was carrying 989 containers of munitions, each of them 20 feet long with a total estimated net weight of 14,000 tons.

Asked about the Wehr Elbe, a Pentagon spokesperson confirmed to Amnesty International that “the unloading of the entire US munitions shipment was successfully completed at Ashdod [Israel] on 22 March”. The spokesperson said that the shipment was destined for a U.S. pre-positioned ammunition stockpile in Israel. Under a US-Israel agreement, munitions from this stockpile may be transferred for Israeli use if necessary.

Some of the white phosphorus artillery shells that Israeli forces fired into densely populated residential areas in Gaza last January, killing and injuring scores of Palestinian civilians, were from US-made stockpiles – as clearly indicated by the marking (M825 A1). Other white phosphorus artillery shells were also US-made, as were the overwhelming majority of the other munitions used by Israeli forces to commit grave violations of international law in the recent three-week conflict in Gaza.

Another U.S. official told Amnesty International that the U.S. authorities are reviewing Israel’s use of U.S. weapons during the Gaza conflict to see if Israel complied with U.S. law, but no conclusion has yet been reached.

In the meantime, Palestinian civilians continue to die of wounds sustained in Israeli attacks last January. Two days ago Ghada Abu Halima, who had sustained deep burns from a white phosphorus attack on 4 January, died of her wounds. The attack had killed her husband’s father and four young siblings, including a one-year-old girl, and had severely injured her, her mother-in-law and several other children in the family.

Amnesty International said that the delivery should have been stopped and that failure to do so throws into question whether President Obama will act to prevent US weapons from fuelling conflicts and contributing to attacks against civilians that may amount to war crimes, as were perpetrated in Gaza.

“Legally and morally, this U.S. arms shipment should have been halted by the Obama administration given the extent of the evidence showing how military equipment and munitions of this kind were recently used by the Israeli forces to commit war crimes,” said Brian Wood. “Arms supplies in these circumstances are contrary to provisions in U.S. law.

“There is a great risk that the new munitions may be used by the Israeli military to commit further violations of international law, like the ones committed during the war in Gaza. We are urging all governments to impose an immediate and comprehensive suspension of arms to Israel, and to all Palestinian armed groups until there is no longer a substantial risk of serious human rights violations.”

The U.S. was by far the largest supplier of weapons to Israel between 2004 and 2008. The US government is also due to provide $30 billion in military aid to Israel.

According to one U.S. official, President Obama has no plans to cut the billions of dollars in military aid promised to Israel under a new 10-year contract agreed in 2007 by the Bush administration. This new contract is a 25 per cent increase compared to the last contract agreed by the previous U.S. administration.

Amnesty International has reported in detail on suspected war crimes committed by the IDF and by Palestinian armed groups in Gaza. On 15 January, Amnesty International called on all governments to immediately suspend arms transfers to all parties to the Gaza conflict to prevent further violations being committed using munitions and other military equipment.

U.S. munitions delivered to Israel

2 April 2009

A massive consignment of U.S. munitions was delivered to Israel in recent weeks, according to information revealed by Amnesty International. The organization received information that the Wehr Elbe, a German cargo ship, chartered and controlled by U.S. Military Sealift Command, docked and unloaded its cargo of reportedly over 300 containers at the Israeli port of Ashdod, just 40km north of Gaza by road on 22 March.

The German ship left the USA for Israel on 20 December, one week before the start of Israeli attacks on Gaza. It was carrying 989 containers of munitions, each of them 20 feet long with a total estimated net weight of 14,000 tons.

Asked about the Wehr Elbe, a Pentagon spokesperson confirmed to Amnesty International that “the unloading of the entire US munitions shipment was successfully completed at Ashdod [Israel] on 22 March”. The spokesperson said that the shipment was destined for a U.S. pre-positioned ammunition stockpile in Israel. Under a US-Israel agreement, munitions from this stockpile may be transferred for Israeli use if necessary.

Some of the white phosphorus artillery shells that Israeli forces fired into densely populated residential areas in Gaza last January, killing and injuring scores of Palestinian civilians, were from US-made stockpiles – as clearly indicated by the marking (M825 A1). Other white phosphorus artillery shells were also US-made, as were the overwhelming majority of the other munitions used by Israeli forces to commit grave violations of international law in the recent three-week conflict in Gaza.

Another U.S. official told Amnesty International that the U.S. authorities are reviewing Israel’s use of U.S. weapons during the Gaza conflict to see if Israel complied with U.S. law, but no conclusion has yet been reached.

In the meantime, Palestinian civilians continue to die of wounds sustained in Israeli attacks last January. Two days ago Ghada Abu Halima, who had sustained deep burns from a white phosphorus attack on 4 January, died of her wounds. The attack had killed her husband’s father and four young siblings, including a one-year-old girl, and had severely injured her, her mother-in-law and several other children in the family.

Amnesty International said that the delivery should have been stopped and that failure to do so throws into question whether President Obama will act to prevent US weapons from fuelling conflicts and contributing to attacks against civilians that may amount to war crimes, as were perpetrated in Gaza.

“Legally and morally, this U.S. arms shipment should have been halted by the Obama administration given the extent of the evidence showing how military equipment and munitions of this kind were recently used by the Israeli forces to commit war crimes,” said Brian Wood. “Arms supplies in these circumstances are contrary to provisions in U.S. law.

“There is a great risk that the new munitions may be used by the Israeli military to commit further violations of international law, like the ones committed during the war in Gaza. We are urging all governments to impose an immediate and comprehensive suspension of arms to Israel, and to all Palestinian armed groups until there is no longer a substantial risk of serious human rights violations.”

The U.S. was by far the largest supplier of weapons to Israel between 2004 and 2008. The US government is also due to provide $30 billion in military aid to Israel.

According to one U.S. official, President Obama has no plans to cut the billions of dollars in military aid promised to Israel under a new 10-year contract agreed in 2007 by the Bush administration. This new contract is a 25 per cent increase compared to the last contract agreed by the previous U.S. administration.

Amnesty International has reported in detail on suspected war crimes committed by the IDF and by Palestinian armed groups in Gaza. On 15 January, Amnesty International called on all governments to immediately suspend arms transfers to all parties to the Gaza conflict to prevent further violations being committed using munitions and other military equipment.


U.S. official: Obama won’t cut military aid to Israel
VIA http://www.haaretz.com

U.S. President Barack Obama will not cut the billions of dollars in military aid promised to Israel, a senior U.S. administration official said Wednesday.

The $30 billion in aid promised to Israel over the next decade will not be harmed by the world financial crisis, the official told Israel Radio. He spoke on condition of anonymity.

The Obama Administration however expects the next government of Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu to continue peace negotiations with the Palestinians, he said.

The increased military aid was promised to outgoing prime minister Ehud Olmert by then-under secretary of state for political affairs Nicholas Burns in August 2007.

Israel Radio also quoted the official as saying that if Hamas joins a Palestinian unity cabinet but does not accept the conditions of the Quartet of Middle East peace sponsors – the U.S., European Union, United Nations and Russia – the Obama Administration would have no dealings with that government.

The radical Islamist movement ruling Gaza is holding talks in Cairo with the secular Fatah party of moderate President Mahmoud Abbas and other factions on forming a unity government.

The talks in Cairo are a bid to reconcile between the rivaling factions, which have been locked in a bitter power struggle since Hamas beat Fatah in January 2006 elections and culminated in the Islamist group violently seizing sole control of Gaza in June 2007.

After the Hamas elections victory, the Quartet said it would boycott Hamas, unless it recognized Israel’s right to exist, endorsed past interim peace deals calling for a two-state solution to the conflict, and renounced violence.


U.S. official: Obama won’t cut military aid to Israel
VIA http://www.haaretz.com

U.S. President Barack Obama will not cut the billions of dollars in military aid promised to Israel, a senior U.S. administration official said Wednesday.

The $30 billion in aid promised to Israel over the next decade will not be harmed by the world financial crisis, the official told Israel Radio. He spoke on condition of anonymity.

The Obama Administration however expects the next government of Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu to continue peace negotiations with the Palestinians, he said.

The increased military aid was promised to outgoing prime minister Ehud Olmert by then-under secretary of state for political affairs Nicholas Burns in August 2007.

Israel Radio also quoted the official as saying that if Hamas joins a Palestinian unity cabinet but does not accept the conditions of the Quartet of Middle East peace sponsors – the U.S., European Union, United Nations and Russia – the Obama Administration would have no dealings with that government.

The radical Islamist movement ruling Gaza is holding talks in Cairo with the secular Fatah party of moderate President Mahmoud Abbas and other factions on forming a unity government.

The talks in Cairo are a bid to reconcile between the rivaling factions, which have been locked in a bitter power struggle since Hamas beat Fatah in January 2006 elections and culminated in the Islamist group violently seizing sole control of Gaza in June 2007.

After the Hamas elections victory, the Quartet said it would boycott Hamas, unless it recognized Israel’s right to exist, endorsed past interim peace deals calling for a two-state solution to the conflict, and renounced violence.


U.S. official: Obama won’t cut military aid to Israel
VIA http://www.haaretz.com

U.S. President Barack Obama will not cut the billions of dollars in military aid promised to Israel, a senior U.S. administration official said Wednesday.

The $30 billion in aid promised to Israel over the next decade will not be harmed by the world financial crisis, the official told Israel Radio. He spoke on condition of anonymity.

The Obama Administration however expects the next government of Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu to continue peace negotiations with the Palestinians, he said.

The increased military aid was promised to outgoing prime minister Ehud Olmert by then-under secretary of state for political affairs Nicholas Burns in August 2007.

Israel Radio also quoted the official as saying that if Hamas joins a Palestinian unity cabinet but does not accept the conditions of the Quartet of Middle East peace sponsors – the U.S., European Union, United Nations and Russia – the Obama Administration would have no dealings with that government.

The radical Islamist movement ruling Gaza is holding talks in Cairo with the secular Fatah party of moderate President Mahmoud Abbas and other factions on forming a unity government.

The talks in Cairo are a bid to reconcile between the rivaling factions, which have been locked in a bitter power struggle since Hamas beat Fatah in January 2006 elections and culminated in the Islamist group violently seizing sole control of Gaza in June 2007.

After the Hamas elections victory, the Quartet said it would boycott Hamas, unless it recognized Israel’s right to exist, endorsed past interim peace deals calling for a two-state solution to the conflict, and renounced violence.

by Michel Chossudovsky


“We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger” –President Barack Obama, State of the Union Address 24 Feb 2009

“Those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account—to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day—because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.” –President Barack Obama, A New Era of Responsibility, the 2010 Budget

“Strong economic medicine” with a “human face”

“Promise amid peril.” The stated priorities of the Obama economic package are health, education, renewable energy, investment in infrastructure and transportation. “Quality education” is at the forefront. Obama has also promised to “make health care more affordable and accessible”, for every American.

At first sight, the budget proposal has all the appearances of an expansionary program, a demand oriented “Second New Deal” geared towards creating employment, rebuilding shattered social programs and reviving the real economy.

The realities are otherwise. Obama’s promise is based on a mammoth austerity program. The entire fiscal structure is shattered, turned upside down.

To reach these stated objectives, a significant hike in public spending on social programs (health, education, housing, social security) would be required as well as the implementation of a large scale public investment program. Major shifts in the composition of public expenditure would also be required: i.e. a move out of a war economy, requiring a movement out of military related spending in favour of civilian programs.

In actuality, what we are dealing with is the most drastic curtailment in public spending in American history, leading to social havoc and the potential impoverishment of millions of people.

The Obama promise largely serves the interests of Wall Street, the defence contractors and the oil conglomerates. In turn, the Bush-Obama bank “bailouts” are leading America into a spiralling public debt crisis. The economic and social dislocations are potentially devastating.

Obama’s budget submitted to Congress on February 26, 2009 envisages outlays for the 2010 fiscal year (commencing October 1st 2009) of $3.94 trillion, an increase of 32 percent. Total government revenues for the 2010 fiscal year, according to preliminary estimates by the Bureau of Budget, are of the order of $2.381 trillion.

The predicted budget deficit (according to the president’s speech) is of the order of $1.75 trillion, almost 12 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product.

War and Wall Street

This is a “War Budget”. The austerity measures hit all major federal spending programs with the exception of: 1. Defence and the Middle East War: 2. the Wall Street bank bailout, 3. Interest payments on a staggering public debt.

The budget diverts tax revenues into financing the war. It legitimizes the fraudulent transfers of tax dollars to the financial elites under the “bank bailouts”.

The pattern of deficit spending is not expansionary. We are not dealing with a Keynesian style deficit, which stimulates investment and consumer demand, leading to an expansion of production and employment.

The “bank bailouts” (involving several initiatives financed by tax dollars) constitute a component of government expenditure. Both the Bush and Obama bank bailouts are hand outs to major financial institutions. They do not not constitute a positive spending injection into the real economy. Quite the opposite. The bailouts contribute to financing the restructuring of the banking system leading to a massive concentration of wealth and centralization of banking power.

A large part of the bailout money granted by the Us government will be transferred electronically to various affiliated accounts including the hedge funds. The largest banks in the US will also use this windfall cash to buy out their weaker competitors, thereby consolidating their position. The tendency, therefore, is towards a new wave of corporate buyouts, mergers and acquisitions in the financial services industry.

In turn, the financial elites will use these large amounts of liquid assets (paper wealth), together with the hundreds of billions acquired through speculative trade, to buy out real economy corporations (airlines, the automobile industry, Telecoms, media, etc ), whose quoted value on the stock markets has tumbled.

In essence, a budget deficit ( combined with massive cuts in social programs) is required to fund the handouts to the banks as well as finance defence spending and the military surge in the Middle East war. Obama’s budget envisages:

1. defense spending of $534 billion for 2010, a supplemental 130 billion dollar appropriation for fiscal 2010 for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and a supplemental $75.5 billion emergency war funding for the rest of the 2009 fiscal year. Defence spending and the Middle East war, with various supplemental budgets, is (officially) of the order of 739.5 billion. Some estimates place aggregate defence and military related spending at $ 1 trillion+.

2. A bank bailout of the order of $750 billion announced by Obama, which is added on to the 700 billion dollar bailout money already allocated by the outgoing Bush administration under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). The total of both programs is a staggering 1.45 trillion dollars to be financed by the Treasury. It should be understood that the actual amount of cash financial “aid” to the banks is significantly larger than $1.45 trillion. (See Table 2 below).

3. Net Interest on the outstanding public debt is estimated by the Bureau of the Budget) at $164 billion in 2010.

The order of magnitude of these allocations is staggering. Under a “balanced budget” criterion –which has been a priority of government economic policy since the Reagan era–, almost all the revenues of the federal government amounting to $2.381 trillion would be used to finance the bank bailout (1.45 trillion), the war ($739 billion) and interest payments on the public debt ($164 billion). In other words, no money would be left over for other categories of public expenditure.

TABLE 1 Budgetary allocations to Defence (FY 2009 and 2010), the Bank Bailout and Net Interests on the Public Debt (FY 2010)

$ Billions

Defence including Supplementary allocations; $534 billion (FY 2010), $130 billion supplemental (FY 2010), $75.5 billion emergency funding (FY2009)

739.5
*Bank bailout (TARP plus Obama) 1450.0
Net Interest 164.0
TOTAL 2353.5
Total Individual (Federal) Income Tax Revenues (FY 2010) 1061.0
Total Federal Government Revenue (FY 2010) 2381.0

Source: Bureau of the Budget and official statements. See A New Era of Responsibility: The 2010 Budget
See also Office of Management and Budget

* The officially announced bank bailouts to be financed from Treasury Funds. The timing of disbursements could take place over more than one fiscal years fiscal years. The actual value of bank bailout cash injections is substantially higher.

The Budget Deficit

These three categories of expenditure (Defence, Bank Bailout and Interest on the Public Debt) would virtually swallow up the entire 2010 federal government revenue of 2381.0. billion dollars

Moreover, as a basis of comparison, all the revenue accruing from individual federal income taxes ($1.061 trillion), (FY 2010) namely all the money households across America pay annually in the form of federal taxes, will not suffice to finance the handouts to the banks, which officially are of the order of 1.45 trillion. This amount includes the $ 700 billion (granted during FY 2009) under the TARP program plus the proposed $ 750 billion granted by the Obama administration.

While TARP and Obama’s proposed bailout are to be disbursed over Fy 2009 and 2010, they nonetheless represent almost half of total government expenditure (half of Obama’s $3.94 trillion budget for fiscal 2010), which is financed by regular sources of revenue ($2381 billion) plus a staggering $1.75 trillion budget deficit, which ultimately requires the issuing of Treasury Bills and government bonds.

The feasibility of a large short-term expansion of the public debt at a time of crisis is yet another matter, particularly with interest rates at abysmally low levels.

The budget deficit is of the order of 1.75 trillion. Obama acknowledges a 1.3 trillion-dollar budget deficit, inherited from the Bush administration. In actuality, the budget deficit is much larger .

The official figures tend to underestimate the seriousness of the budgetary predicament. The $1.75 trillion dollar budget deficit figure is questionable because the various amounts disbursed under TARP and other related bank bailouts including Obama’s announced $750 billion aid program to financial institutions are not acknowledged in the government’s expenditure accounts.

“The aid hasn’t been requested formally, but appears in a line item “for potential additional financial stabilization efforts,” according to the budget overview. The budget office calculated a $250 billion net cost to taxpayers this year, because it anticipates it would eventually recoup some, though not all, of the money expended to help financial companies.

The funds would come on top of the $700 billion rescue package approved last October by Congress. The White House budgets no money for fiscal 2010 and beyond for such aid.” (Bloomberg, February 27, 2010)

Fiscal Collapse

A major crisis of the federal fiscal structure is occurring. The multibillion dollar allocations to the War Budget and to the Wall Street Bank Bailout program backlash on all other categories of public expenditure.

The Bush administration’s $ 700 billion bailout under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was approved by Congress in October. TARP is but the tip of the iceberg. A panoply of bailout allocations in addition to the $ 700 billion were decided upon prior to Obama assuming office. In November, the federal government’s bank rescue program was estimated at a staggering 8.5 trillion dollars, an amount equivalent to more than 60% of the US public debt estimated at 14 trillion (2007). (See table 2 below)

Meanwhile, under the Obama budget proposal, 634 billion dollars are allocated to a reserve fund to finance universal health care. At first sight, it appears to be a large amount. But it is to be spent over a ten year period, — i.e. a modest annual commitment of 63.4 billion.

Public spending will be slashed with a view to curtailing a spiralling budget deficit. Health and education programs will not only remain heavily underfunded, they will be slashed, revamped and privatized. The likely outcome is the outright privatization of public services and the sale of State assets including public infrastructure, urban services, highways, national parks, etc. Fiscal collapse leads to the privatization of the State.

The fiscal crisis is further exacerbated by the compression of tax revenues resulting from decline of the real economy. Unemployed workers do not pay taxes nor do bankrupt firms. The process is cumulative. The solution to the fiscal crisis becomes the cause of further collapse.

Structure of The Public Debt

This large scale appropriation of liquid money assets under the bank bailouts by a handful of financial institutions serves to increase the public debt overnight.

When the US Treasury allocates 700 billion dollars to the Troubled Assets Relief Program, this amount constitutes a budgetary outlay which inevitably must be financed from within the structure of government revenues and expenditures.

Unless all other categories of public expenditure including health, education and social services are slashed, the various outlays under the bank bailout will require running a massive budget deficit which in turn will increase the US public debt.

America is the most indebted country on earth. The US (federal government) public debt is currently of the order of $14 trillion. This does not include mounting public debts at the state and municipal levels.

This US dollar denominated (federal) debt is composed of outstanding treasury bills and government bonds. The public debt, also called “the national debt” is the amount of money owed by the federal government to holders of U.S. debt instruments.

US debt instruments are held by American residents as part of their savings portfolio, companies and financial institutions, US government agencies, foreign governments, individuals in foreign countries. but does not include intergovernmental debt obligations or debt held in the Social Security Trust Fund. Types of securities held by the public include, but are not limited to, Treasury Bills, Notes, Bonds, TIPS, United States Savings Bonds, and State and Local Government Series securities.

The proposed solution becomes the cause of the crisis. The 700 billion bailout under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) combined with the proposed Obama $750 billion aid to financial services industry is but the tip of the iceberg. A panoply of bailout allocations in addition to the 700 billion have been decided upon.

Table 2

The Bush Administration’s ” Bank Bailout”

The government’s bank rescue program under the Bush administration was estimated at a staggering 8.5 trillion dollars, an amount equivalent to 60% of the Total Gross Federal debt of 14.078 trillion (2010) (See Table 2 above). This amount does not include the “aid” to financial institutions proposed by the Obama administration, including an additional 750 billion dollars in Obama’s February 2009 budget proposal. The size of these allocations of liquid assets endangers the very structures of the fiscal and monetary system.

The total of Bush bank bailouts (8.5 trillion) can be broken down into funds granted by the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Housing Authority.

The handouts to the financial institutions financed out of Treasury are government expenditures, to be met either through tax revenues or through the emission of public debt instruments.

The disbursements under TARP are categorized by the Bureau of the Budget as part of “a mandatory program” under an Act of the US Congress.. The Treasury’s liability, which includes the controversial Troubled Assets Relief Program, was estimated in November 2008 at 1.1 trillion dollars. (See Table 2) Further Treasury allocations, which serve to heighten the burden of the public debt have been envisaged by the Obama administration

Spiralling Public Debt Crisis

Is the Treasury in a position to finance this mounting budget deficit officially tagged at 1.75 billion through the emission of Treasury bills and government bonds?

The largest budget deficit in US history coupled with the lowest interest rates in US history: With the Fed’s ” near zero” percent discount rate, the markets for US dollar denominated government bonds and Treasury bills are in straightjacket. Moreover, the essential functions of savings (which is central to the functioning of a national economy) is in crisis. .

Who wants to invest in US government debt? What is the demand for Treasury bills at exceedingly low interest rates?

Table 3 Interest Rates in Percent

Treasury securities Updated 2/25/2009
This week Month ago Year ago
One-Year Treasury Constant Maturity 0.64 0.43 2.10
91-day T-bill auction avg disc rate 0.300 0.150 2.160
182-day T-bill auction avg disc rate 0.495 0.350 2.070
Two-Year Treasury Constant Maturity 0.95 0.77 2.04
Five-Year Treasury Constant Maturity 1.79 1.58 2.89
Ten-Year Treasury Constant Maturity 2.75 2.56 3.85
One-Year MTA 1.633 1.823 4.326
One-Year CMT (Monthly) 0.44 0.49 2.71

Source Bankrate.com


The market for US dollar denominated debt instruments is potentially at a standstill, which means that the Treasury lacks the ability to finance its mammoth budget deficit through public debt operations, leading the entire budgetary process into a quandary.

The question is whether China and Japan will continue to purchase US dollar denominated debt instruments. Washington is running a public relations campaign to lure Asian investors into buying T-bills and US government bonds. .

With the markets for US dollar denominated debt (both domestically and internationally) in crisis, further pressure will be exerted on the Treasury to slash (civilian) public expenditure to the bone, exact user fees for public services and sell off public assets, including State infrastructure and institutions. In all likelihood, this crisis is leading us to the privatization of the State, where activities hitherto under government jurisdiction will be transferred into private hands.

Who will be buying State assets at rock bottom prices? The financial elites, which are also the recipients of the bank bailout.

Consolidation of the Banks

A massive amount of liquidity has been injected into the financial system, from the bailouts but also from pension funds, individual savings, etc.

The stated objective of the bank bailout programs is to alleviate the banks’ burden of bad debts and non-performing loans. In actuality what is happening is that these massive amounts of money are being used by a handful of institutions to consolidate their position in global banking.

The exposure of the banks, largely the result of derivative trade, is estimated in the tens of trillions of dollars, to the extent that the amounts and guarantees granted by the Treasury and the Fed will not resolve the crisis. Nor are they intended to resolve the crisis.

The mainstream media suggests that the banks are being nationalized as a result of TARP, In fact, it is exactly the opposite: the State is being taken over by the banks, the State is being privatized. The establishment of a Worldwide unipolar financial system is part of the broader project of the Wall Street financial elites to establish the contours of a world government.

In a bitter irony, the recipients of the bailout under TARP and Obama’s proposed $750 billion aid to financial institutions are the creditors of the federal government. The Wall Street banks are the brokers and underwriters of the US public debt, although they hold only a portion of the debt, they transact and trade in US dollar denominated public debt instruments Worldwide.

They act as creditors of the US State. They evaluate the creditworthiness of the US government, they rank the public debt through Moody’s and Standard and Poor. They control the US Treasury, the Federal Reserve Board and the US Congress. They oversee and dictate fiscal and monetary policy, ensuring that the State acts in their interest.

Since the Reagan era, Wall Street dominates most areas of economic and social policy. It sets the budgetary agenda, ensuring the curtailment of social expenditures. Wall Street preaches balanced budgets but the practice has been lobbying for the elimination of corporate taxes, the granting of handouts to corporations, tax write-offs in mergers and acquisitions etc, all of which lead to a spiralling public debt.

Circular and Contradictory Relationship

The Federal Reserve system is a privately owned central bank. While the Federal Reserve Board is a government body, the process of money creation is controlled by the 12 Federal Reserve Banks, which are privately owned.

The shareholders of the Federal Reserve banks (with the New York Federal Reserve Bank playing a dominant role) are among America’s most powerful financial institutions.

While the Federal Reserve can create money “out of thin air”, the multibillion outlays of the Treasury (including the TARP program) will require the emission of public debt in the form of Treasury Bills and government bonds.

US financial institutions oversee the US public debt. They are involved in the sale of treasury bills and government bonds on financial markets in the US and around the World. But they also hold part of the public debt. In this regard, they are the creditors of the US government. Part of this increased public debt required to rescue the banks will be financed or brokered by the same financial institutions which are the object of the bank rescue plan.

We are dealing with a pernicious circular relationship. When the banks pressured the Treasury to assist them in the form of a major bank rescue operation, it was understood from the outset that the banks would in turn assist the Treasury in financing the handouts of which they are the recipients.

To finance the bank bailout, the Treasury needs to run a massive budget deficit, which in turn requires a staggering increase of the US public debt.

Public opinion has been misled. The US government is in a sense financing its own indebtedness: the money granted to the banks is in part financed by borrowing from the banks.

The banks lend money to the government and with the money they lend the government, the Treasury finances the bailout. In turn, the banks impose conditionalities on the management of the US public debt. They dictate how the money should be spent. They impose fiscal responsibility, they dictate massive cuts in social expenditures which result in the collapse and/or privatization of public services. They impose the privatization of urban infrastructure, roads, sewer and water systems, public recreational areas, everything is up for privatization.

The recipient banks are the beneficiaries as well as the creditors. As creditors, they will oblige the government a) to slash expenditures b) to run up the public debt through the issuing of treasury bills and government bonds.

This public debt crisis is all the more serious because the US federal government does not control monetary policy. All public debt operations go through the Federal reserve, which is in charge of monetary policy, acting on behalf of private financial interests. The government as such has no authority over money creation. This means that public debt operations essentially serve the interests of the banks.

Continuity from Bush to Obama

The Obama stimulus program constitutes a continuation of the Bush administration’s bank bailout packages. The proposed policy solution to the crisis becomes the cause, ultimately resulting in further real economy bankruptcies and a corresponding collapse of the standard of living of Americans.

Both the Bush and Obama bank bailouts are intended to come to the rescue of troubled financial institutions, to ensure the payment of “inter-bank” debt operations. In practice, large amounts of money transit through the banking system, from the banks to the hedge funds, to offshore banking havens and back to the banks.

The government and the media tend to focus on the ambiguous notion of ” inter-bank debts”. The identity of the creditors is rarely mentioned.

Multi-billion dollar transfers are conducted electronically from one financial entity to another. Where is the money going? Who is collecting these multibillion debts, which are in large part the consequence of financial manipulation and derivative trade?

There are indications that the financial institutions are transferring billions of dollars into their affiliated hedge funds. From these hedge funds they can then channel money capital towards the acquisition of real assets.

Through what circuitous financial mechanisms were these debts created? Where is the bailout money going? Who is cashing in on the multibillion dollar government bailout money? This process is contributing to an unprecedented concentration of private wealth.

Concluding Remarks

Financial manipulation is an integral part of the New World Order. It constitutes a powerful means to accumulate wealth. Under the present political arrangement, those responsible for monetary policy are quite deliberately serving the interests of the financiers, to the detriment of working people, leading to economic dislocation, unemployment and mass poverty.

This article has focussed on how financial manipulation has served to shatter the structure of US public expenditure.

More generally, this restructuring of global financial markets and institutions (alongside the pillage of national economies) has enabled the accumulation of vast amounts of private wealth – a large portion of which has been amassed as a result of strictly speculative transactions.

This critical drain of billions of dollars of household savings and state tax revenues paralyses the functions of government spending and spurs the accumulation of a public debt, which can no longer be be financed through the emission of US dollar denominated debt.

What we are dealing with is the fraudulent transfer and confiscation of lifelong savings and pension funds, the fraudulent appropriation of tax revenues to finance the bank bailouts, etc. To understand what has happened: follow the money trail of electronic transfers with a view to establishing where the money has gone. What is at stake is the outright criminalization of the financial system:financial theft” on an unprecedented scale.

The monetary system, which is integrated into the State budgetary process has been destabilized. The fundamental relationship between the monetary system and the real economy is in crisis.

The creation of money “out of thin air” threatens the value of the US dollar as an international currency. Similarly, the financing of a mammoth US budget deficit through dollar denominated debt instruments is impaired as a result of exceedingly low interest rates. Moreover, the process of household savings is undermined with interest rates close to zero.

What we have dealt with in this article is one central aspect of an evolving process of global financial collapse.

The international payments system is in crisis. The economic prospects are terrifying. Bankruptcies in the US, Canada, the European Union are occurring at an alarming rate. Country level exports have collapsed, leading to a contraction of international trade Reports from the Asian economies indicate a massive increase in unemployment. In China’s Pearl River basin in Southern Guangdong province’s industrial export processing economy, some 700,000 workers were laid off in January. (China Morning Post, Feb 6, 2009). In Japan, industrial output has collapsed by more than 20 percent since December. In the Philippines, a country of 90 million people, exports collapsed by more than 40 percent in December.

Financial Disarmament

There are no solutions under the prevailing global financial architecture. Meaningful policies cannot be achieved without radically reforming the workings of the international banking system.

What is required is an overhaul of the monetary system including the functions and ownership of the central bank, the arrest and prosecution of those involved in financial fraud both in the financial system and in governmental agencies, the freeze of all accounts where fraudulent transfers have been deposited, the cancellation of debts resulting from fraudulent trade and/or market manipulation.

People across the land, nationally and internationally, must mobilize. This struggle to democratise the financial and fiscal apparatus must be broad-based and democratic encompassing all sectors of society at all levels, in all countries. What is ultimately required is to disarm the financial establishment:

-confiscate those assets which were obtained through fraud and financial manipulation.

-restore the savings of households through reverse transfers

-return the bailout money to the Treasury, freeze the activities of the hedge funds. .

- freeze the gamut of speculative transactions including short-selling and derivative trade.



ANNEX

Documents


A New Era of Responsibility: The 2010 Budget

The tables contained in Annex can also be consulted by clicking:

Summary Tables

See also:

http://www.budget.gov

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy10/pdf/fy10-newera.pdf




The Economic Depression was predicted in this 2002 best-seller

The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order



by Michel Chossudovsky


“We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger” –President Barack Obama, State of the Union Address 24 Feb 2009

“Those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account—to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day—because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.” –President Barack Obama, A New Era of Responsibility, the 2010 Budget

“Strong economic medicine” with a “human face”

“Promise amid peril.” The stated priorities of the Obama economic package are health, education, renewable energy, investment in infrastructure and transportation. “Quality education” is at the forefront. Obama has also promised to “make health care more affordable and accessible”, for every American.

At first sight, the budget proposal has all the appearances of an expansionary program, a demand oriented “Second New Deal” geared towards creating employment, rebuilding shattered social programs and reviving the real economy.

The realities are otherwise. Obama’s promise is based on a mammoth austerity program. The entire fiscal structure is shattered, turned upside down.

To reach these stated objectives, a significant hike in public spending on social programs (health, education, housing, social security) would be required as well as the implementation of a large scale public investment program. Major shifts in the composition of public expenditure would also be required: i.e. a move out of a war economy, requiring a movement out of military related spending in favour of civilian programs.

In actuality, what we are dealing with is the most drastic curtailment in public spending in American history, leading to social havoc and the potential impoverishment of millions of people.

The Obama promise largely serves the interests of Wall Street, the defence contractors and the oil conglomerates. In turn, the Bush-Obama bank “bailouts” are leading America into a spiralling public debt crisis. The economic and social dislocations are potentially devastating.

Obama’s budget submitted to Congress on February 26, 2009 envisages outlays for the 2010 fiscal year (commencing October 1st 2009) of $3.94 trillion, an increase of 32 percent. Total government revenues for the 2010 fiscal year, according to preliminary estimates by the Bureau of Budget, are of the order of $2.381 trillion.

The predicted budget deficit (according to the president’s speech) is of the order of $1.75 trillion, almost 12 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product.

War and Wall Street

This is a “War Budget”. The austerity measures hit all major federal spending programs with the exception of: 1. Defence and the Middle East War: 2. the Wall Street bank bailout, 3. Interest payments on a staggering public debt.

The budget diverts tax revenues into financing the war. It legitimizes the fraudulent transfers of tax dollars to the financial elites under the “bank bailouts”.

The pattern of deficit spending is not expansionary. We are not dealing with a Keynesian style deficit, which stimulates investment and consumer demand, leading to an expansion of production and employment.

The “bank bailouts” (involving several initiatives financed by tax dollars) constitute a component of government expenditure. Both the Bush and Obama bank bailouts are hand outs to major financial institutions. They do not not constitute a positive spending injection into the real economy. Quite the opposite. The bailouts contribute to financing the restructuring of the banking system leading to a massive concentration of wealth and centralization of banking power.

A large part of the bailout money granted by the Us government will be transferred electronically to various affiliated accounts including the hedge funds. The largest banks in the US will also use this windfall cash to buy out their weaker competitors, thereby consolidating their position. The tendency, therefore, is towards a new wave of corporate buyouts, mergers and acquisitions in the financial services industry.

In turn, the financial elites will use these large amounts of liquid assets (paper wealth), together with the hundreds of billions acquired through speculative trade, to buy out real economy corporations (airlines, the automobile industry, Telecoms, media, etc ), whose quoted value on the stock markets has tumbled.

In essence, a budget deficit ( combined with massive cuts in social programs) is required to fund the handouts to the banks as well as finance defence spending and the military surge in the Middle East war. Obama’s budget envisages:

1. defense spending of $534 billion for 2010, a supplemental 130 billion dollar appropriation for fiscal 2010 for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and a supplemental $75.5 billion emergency war funding for the rest of the 2009 fiscal year. Defence spending and the Middle East war, with various supplemental budgets, is (officially) of the order of 739.5 billion. Some estimates place aggregate defence and military related spending at $ 1 trillion+.

2. A bank bailout of the order of $750 billion announced by Obama, which is added on to the 700 billion dollar bailout money already allocated by the outgoing Bush administration under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). The total of both programs is a staggering 1.45 trillion dollars to be financed by the Treasury. It should be understood that the actual amount of cash financial “aid” to the banks is significantly larger than $1.45 trillion. (See Table 2 below).

3. Net Interest on the outstanding public debt is estimated by the Bureau of the Budget) at $164 billion in 2010.

The order of magnitude of these allocations is staggering. Under a “balanced budget” criterion –which has been a priority of government economic policy since the Reagan era–, almost all the revenues of the federal government amounting to $2.381 trillion would be used to finance the bank bailout (1.45 trillion), the war ($739 billion) and interest payments on the public debt ($164 billion). In other words, no money would be left over for other categories of public expenditure.

TABLE 1 Budgetary allocations to Defence (FY 2009 and 2010), the Bank Bailout and Net Interests on the Public Debt (FY 2010)

$ Billions

Defence including Supplementary allocations; $534 billion (FY 2010), $130 billion supplemental (FY 2010), $75.5 billion emergency funding (FY2009)

739.5
*Bank bailout (TARP plus Obama) 1450.0
Net Interest 164.0
TOTAL 2353.5
Total Individual (Federal) Income Tax Revenues (FY 2010) 1061.0
Total Federal Government Revenue (FY 2010) 2381.0

Source: Bureau of the Budget and official statements. See A New Era of Responsibility: The 2010 Budget
See also Office of Management and Budget

* The officially announced bank bailouts to be financed from Treasury Funds. The timing of disbursements could take place over more than one fiscal years fiscal years. The actual value of bank bailout cash injections is substantially higher.

The Budget Deficit

These three categories of expenditure (Defence, Bank Bailout and Interest on the Public Debt) would virtually swallow up the entire 2010 federal government revenue of 2381.0. billion dollars

Moreover, as a basis of comparison, all the revenue accruing from individual federal income taxes ($1.061 trillion), (FY 2010) namely all the money households across America pay annually in the form of federal taxes, will not suffice to finance the handouts to the banks, which officially are of the order of 1.45 trillion. This amount includes the $ 700 billion (granted during FY 2009) under the TARP program plus the proposed $ 750 billion granted by the Obama administration.

While TARP and Obama’s proposed bailout are to be disbursed over Fy 2009 and 2010, they nonetheless represent almost half of total government expenditure (half of Obama’s $3.94 trillion budget for fiscal 2010), which is financed by regular sources of revenue ($2381 billion) plus a staggering $1.75 trillion budget deficit, which ultimately requires the issuing of Treasury Bills and government bonds.

The feasibility of a large short-term expansion of the public debt at a time of crisis is yet another matter, particularly with interest rates at abysmally low levels.

The budget deficit is of the order of 1.75 trillion. Obama acknowledges a 1.3 trillion-dollar budget deficit, inherited from the Bush administration. In actuality, the budget deficit is much larger .

The official figures tend to underestimate the seriousness of the budgetary predicament. The $1.75 trillion dollar budget deficit figure is questionable because the various amounts disbursed under TARP and other related bank bailouts including Obama’s announced $750 billion aid program to financial institutions are not acknowledged in the government’s expenditure accounts.

“The aid hasn’t been requested formally, but appears in a line item “for potential additional financial stabilization efforts,” according to the budget overview. The budget office calculated a $250 billion net cost to taxpayers this year, because it anticipates it would eventually recoup some, though not all, of the money expended to help financial companies.

The funds would come on top of the $700 billion rescue package approved last October by Congress. The White House budgets no money for fiscal 2010 and beyond for such aid.” (Bloomberg, February 27, 2010)

Fiscal Collapse

A major crisis of the federal fiscal structure is occurring. The multibillion dollar allocations to the War Budget and to the Wall Street Bank Bailout program backlash on all other categories of public expenditure.

The Bush administration’s $ 700 billion bailout under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was approved by Congress in October. TARP is but the tip of the iceberg. A panoply of bailout allocations in addition to the $ 700 billion were decided upon prior to Obama assuming office. In November, the federal government’s bank rescue program was estimated at a staggering 8.5 trillion dollars, an amount equivalent to more than 60% of the US public debt estimated at 14 trillion (2007). (See table 2 below)

Meanwhile, under the Obama budget proposal, 634 billion dollars are allocated to a reserve fund to finance universal health care. At first sight, it appears to be a large amount. But it is to be spent over a ten year period, — i.e. a modest annual commitment of 63.4 billion.

Public spending will be slashed with a view to curtailing a spiralling budget deficit. Health and education programs will not only remain heavily underfunded, they will be slashed, revamped and privatized. The likely outcome is the outright privatization of public services and the sale of State assets including public infrastructure, urban services, highways, national parks, etc. Fiscal collapse leads to the privatization of the State.

The fiscal crisis is further exacerbated by the compression of tax revenues resulting from decline of the real economy. Unemployed workers do not pay taxes nor do bankrupt firms. The process is cumulative. The solution to the fiscal crisis becomes the cause of further collapse.

Structure of The Public Debt

This large scale appropriation of liquid money assets under the bank bailouts by a handful of financial institutions serves to increase the public debt overnight.

When the US Treasury allocates 700 billion dollars to the Troubled Assets Relief Program, this amount constitutes a budgetary outlay which inevitably must be financed from within the structure of government revenues and expenditures.

Unless all other categories of public expenditure including health, education and social services are slashed, the various outlays under the bank bailout will require running a massive budget deficit which in turn will increase the US public debt.

America is the most indebted country on earth. The US (federal government) public debt is currently of the order of $14 trillion. This does not include mounting public debts at the state and municipal levels.

This US dollar denominated (federal) debt is composed of outstanding treasury bills and government bonds. The public debt, also called “the national debt” is the amount of money owed by the federal government to holders of U.S. debt instruments.

US debt instruments are held by American residents as part of their savings portfolio, companies and financial institutions, US government agencies, foreign governments, individuals in foreign countries. but does not include intergovernmental debt obligations or debt held in the Social Security Trust Fund. Types of securities held by the public include, but are not limited to, Treasury Bills, Notes, Bonds, TIPS, United States Savings Bonds, and State and Local Government Series securities.

The proposed solution becomes the cause of the crisis. The 700 billion bailout under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) combined with the proposed Obama $750 billion aid to financial services industry is but the tip of the iceberg. A panoply of bailout allocations in addition to the 700 billion have been decided upon.

Table 2

The Bush Administration’s ” Bank Bailout”

The government’s bank rescue program under the Bush administration was estimated at a staggering 8.5 trillion dollars, an amount equivalent to 60% of the Total Gross Federal debt of 14.078 trillion (2010) (See Table 2 above). This amount does not include the “aid” to financial institutions proposed by the Obama administration, including an additional 750 billion dollars in Obama’s February 2009 budget proposal. The size of these allocations of liquid assets endangers the very structures of the fiscal and monetary system.

The total of Bush bank bailouts (8.5 trillion) can be broken down into funds granted by the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Housing Authority.

The handouts to the financial institutions financed out of Treasury are government expenditures, to be met either through tax revenues or through the emission of public debt instruments.

The disbursements under TARP are categorized by the Bureau of the Budget as part of “a mandatory program” under an Act of the US Congress.. The Treasury’s liability, which includes the controversial Troubled Assets Relief Program, was estimated in November 2008 at 1.1 trillion dollars. (See Table 2) Further Treasury allocations, which serve to heighten the burden of the public debt have been envisaged by the Obama administration

Spiralling Public Debt Crisis

Is the Treasury in a position to finance this mounting budget deficit officially tagged at 1.75 billion through the emission of Treasury bills and government bonds?

The largest budget deficit in US history coupled with the lowest interest rates in US history: With the Fed’s ” near zero” percent discount rate, the markets for US dollar denominated government bonds and Treasury bills are in straightjacket. Moreover, the essential functions of savings (which is central to the functioning of a national economy) is in crisis. .

Who wants to invest in US government debt? What is the demand for Treasury bills at exceedingly low interest rates?

Table 3 Interest Rates in Percent

Treasury securities Updated 2/25/2009
This week Month ago Year ago
One-Year Treasury Constant Maturity 0.64 0.43 2.10
91-day T-bill auction avg disc rate 0.300 0.150 2.160
182-day T-bill auction avg disc rate 0.495 0.350 2.070
Two-Year Treasury Constant Maturity 0.95 0.77 2.04
Five-Year Treasury Constant Maturity 1.79 1.58 2.89
Ten-Year Treasury Constant Maturity 2.75 2.56 3.85
One-Year MTA 1.633 1.823 4.326
One-Year CMT (Monthly) 0.44 0.49 2.71

Source Bankrate.com


The market for US dollar denominated debt instruments is potentially at a standstill, which means that the Treasury lacks the ability to finance its mammoth budget deficit through public debt operations, leading the entire budgetary process into a quandary.

The question is whether China and Japan will continue to purchase US dollar denominated debt instruments. Washington is running a public relations campaign to lure Asian investors into buying T-bills and US government bonds. .

With the markets for US dollar denominated debt (both domestically and internationally) in crisis, further pressure will be exerted on the Treasury to slash (civilian) public expenditure to the bone, exact user fees for public services and sell off public assets, including State infrastructure and institutions. In all likelihood, this crisis is leading us to the privatization of the State, where activities hitherto under government jurisdiction will be transferred into private hands.

Who will be buying State assets at rock bottom prices? The financial elites, which are also the recipients of the bank bailout.

Consolidation of the Banks

A massive amount of liquidity has been injected into the financial system, from the bailouts but also from pension funds, individual savings, etc.

The stated objective of the bank bailout programs is to alleviate the banks’ burden of bad debts and non-performing loans. In actuality what is happening is that these massive amounts of money are being used by a handful of institutions to consolidate their position in global banking.

The exposure of the banks, largely the result of derivative trade, is estimated in the tens of trillions of dollars, to the extent that the amounts and guarantees granted by the Treasury and the Fed will not resolve the crisis. Nor are they intended to resolve the crisis.

The mainstream media suggests that the banks are being nationalized as a result of TARP, In fact, it is exactly the opposite: the State is being taken over by the banks, the State is being privatized. The establishment of a Worldwide unipolar financial system is part of the broader project of the Wall Street financial elites to establish the contours of a world government.

In a bitter irony, the recipients of the bailout under TARP and Obama’s proposed $750 billion aid to financial institutions are the creditors of the federal government. The Wall Street banks are the brokers and underwriters of the US public debt, although they hold only a portion of the debt, they transact and trade in US dollar denominated public debt instruments Worldwide.

They act as creditors of the US State. They evaluate the creditworthiness of the US government, they rank the public debt through Moody’s and Standard and Poor. They control the US Treasury, the Federal Reserve Board and the US Congress. They oversee and dictate fiscal and monetary policy, ensuring that the State acts in their interest.

Since the Reagan era, Wall Street dominates most areas of economic and social policy. It sets the budgetary agenda, ensuring the curtailment of social expenditures. Wall Street preaches balanced budgets but the practice has been lobbying for the elimination of corporate taxes, the granting of handouts to corporations, tax write-offs in mergers and acquisitions etc, all of which lead to a spiralling public debt.

Circular and Contradictory Relationship

The Federal Reserve system is a privately owned central bank. While the Federal Reserve Board is a government body, the process of money creation is controlled by the 12 Federal Reserve Banks, which are privately owned.

The shareholders of the Federal Reserve banks (with the New York Federal Reserve Bank playing a dominant role) are among America’s most powerful financial institutions.

While the Federal Reserve can create money “out of thin air”, the multibillion outlays of the Treasury (including the TARP program) will require the emission of public debt in the form of Treasury Bills and government bonds.

US financial institutions oversee the US public debt. They are involved in the sale of treasury bills and government bonds on financial markets in the US and around the World. But they also hold part of the public debt. In this regard, they are the creditors of the US government. Part of this increased public debt required to rescue the banks will be financed or brokered by the same financial institutions which are the object of the bank rescue plan.

We are dealing with a pernicious circular relationship. When the banks pressured the Treasury to assist them in the form of a major bank rescue operation, it was understood from the outset that the banks would in turn assist the Treasury in financing the handouts of which they are the recipients.

To finance the bank bailout, the Treasury needs to run a massive budget deficit, which in turn requires a staggering increase of the US public debt.

Public opinion has been misled. The US government is in a sense financing its own indebtedness: the money granted to the banks is in part financed by borrowing from the banks.

The banks lend money to the government and with the money they lend the government, the Treasury finances the bailout. In turn, the banks impose conditionalities on the management of the US public debt. They dictate how the money should be spent. They impose fiscal responsibility, they dictate massive cuts in social expenditures which result in the collapse and/or privatization of public services. They impose the privatization of urban infrastructure, roads, sewer and water systems, public recreational areas, everything is up for privatization.

The recipient banks are the beneficiaries as well as the creditors. As creditors, they will oblige the government a) to slash expenditures b) to run up the public debt through the issuing of treasury bills and government bonds.

This public debt crisis is all the more serious because the US federal government does not control monetary policy. All public debt operations go through the Federal reserve, which is in charge of monetary policy, acting on behalf of private financial interests. The government as such has no authority over money creation. This means that public debt operations essentially serve the interests of the banks.

Continuity from Bush to Obama

The Obama stimulus program constitutes a continuation of the Bush administration’s bank bailout packages. The proposed policy solution to the crisis becomes the cause, ultimately resulting in further real economy bankruptcies and a corresponding collapse of the standard of living of Americans.

Both the Bush and Obama bank bailouts are intended to come to the rescue of troubled financial institutions, to ensure the payment of “inter-bank” debt operations. In practice, large amounts of money transit through the banking system, from the banks to the hedge funds, to offshore banking havens and back to the banks.

The government and the media tend to focus on the ambiguous notion of ” inter-bank debts”. The identity of the creditors is rarely mentioned.

Multi-billion dollar transfers are conducted electronically from one financial entity to another. Where is the money going? Who is collecting these multibillion debts, which are in large part the consequence of financial manipulation and derivative trade?

There are indications that the financial institutions are transferring billions of dollars into their affiliated hedge funds. From these hedge funds they can then channel money capital towards the acquisition of real assets.

Through what circuitous financial mechanisms were these debts created? Where is the bailout money going? Who is cashing in on the multibillion dollar government bailout money? This process is contributing to an unprecedented concentration of private wealth.

Concluding Remarks

Financial manipulation is an integral part of the New World Order. It constitutes a powerful means to accumulate wealth. Under the present political arrangement, those responsible for monetary policy are quite deliberately serving the interests of the financiers, to the detriment of working people, leading to economic dislocation, unemployment and mass poverty.

This article has focussed on how financial manipulation has served to shatter the structure of US public expenditure.

More generally, this restructuring of global financial markets and institutions (alongside the pillage of national economies) has enabled the accumulation of vast amounts of private wealth – a large portion of which has been amassed as a result of strictly speculative transactions.

This critical drain of billions of dollars of household savings and state tax revenues paralyses the functions of government spending and spurs the accumulation of a public debt, which can no longer be be financed through the emission of US dollar denominated debt.

What we are dealing with is the fraudulent transfer and confiscation of lifelong savings and pension funds, the fraudulent appropriation of tax revenues to finance the bank bailouts, etc. To understand what has happened: follow the money trail of electronic transfers with a view to establishing where the money has gone. What is at stake is the outright criminalization of the financial system:financial theft” on an unprecedented scale.

The monetary system, which is integrated into the State budgetary process has been destabilized. The fundamental relationship between the monetary system and the real economy is in crisis.

The creation of money “out of thin air” threatens the value of the US dollar as an international currency. Similarly, the financing of a mammoth US budget deficit through dollar denominated debt instruments is impaired as a result of exceedingly low interest rates. Moreover, the process of household savings is undermined with interest rates close to zero.

What we have dealt with in this article is one central aspect of an evolving process of global financial collapse.

The international payments system is in crisis. The economic prospects are terrifying. Bankruptcies in the US, Canada, the European Union are occurring at an alarming rate. Country level exports have collapsed, leading to a contraction of international trade Reports from the Asian economies indicate a massive increase in unemployment. In China’s Pearl River basin in Southern Guangdong province’s industrial export processing economy, some 700,000 workers were laid off in January. (China Morning Post, Feb 6, 2009). In Japan, industrial output has collapsed by more than 20 percent since December. In the Philippines, a country of 90 million people, exports collapsed by more than 40 percent in December.

Financial Disarmament

There are no solutions under the prevailing global financial architecture. Meaningful policies cannot be achieved without radically reforming the workings of the international banking system.

What is required is an overhaul of the monetary system including the functions and ownership of the central bank, the arrest and prosecution of those involved in financial fraud both in the financial system and in governmental agencies, the freeze of all accounts where fraudulent transfers have been deposited, the cancellation of debts resulting from fraudulent trade and/or market manipulation.

People across the land, nationally and internationally, must mobilize. This struggle to democratise the financial and fiscal apparatus must be broad-based and democratic encompassing all sectors of society at all levels, in all countries. What is ultimately required is to disarm the financial establishment:

-confiscate those assets which were obtained through fraud and financial manipulation.

-restore the savings of households through reverse transfers

-return the bailout money to the Treasury, freeze the activities of the hedge funds. .

- freeze the gamut of speculative transactions including short-selling and derivative trade.



ANNEX

Documents


A New Era of Responsibility: The 2010 Budget

The tables contained in Annex can also be consulted by clicking:

Summary Tables

See also:

http://www.budget.gov

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy10/pdf/fy10-newera.pdf




The Economic Depression was predicted in this 2002 best-seller

The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order



Further Adventures in the Quantum Wrongness Field, Economic Crisis Edition

by Glen Allport

- 1 –

Deeper into the Wrongness

I described the common state of Wrongness in Marooned in the Quantum Wrongness Field (April, 2007). Today, the public is predictably being lured ever-deeper into Wrongness by propaganda about the economic crisis. Among other things, we are told that adding trillions of dollars in new federal debt and printing oceans of new money-from-thin-air will somehow restore prosperity.

Given that such behavior was the primary cause of the crisis, it would seem obvious that more of the same will not solve the problem. Debt doesn’t create prosperity, but heavy debt can certainly vaporize prosperity, and the bailouts have so far added $27,599 in government debt for every U.S. citizen – $110,396 per family of four. (Yes, that’s just new debt). Printing money non-stop doesn’t create prosperity either, as anyone in Zimbabwe can testify (do not miss the video embedded in that link), but the human ability to passionately believe in Things That Are Wrong is apparently stronger than reality itself.

For a time, anyway.

- 2 –

Why is Counterfeiting Illegal?

If printing up trillions of dollars to “stimulate spending” is going to save the economy, why do we ever put up with even the slightest recession? Just print that funky money, boys and girls! Give every citizen a high-speed color laser printer and require everyone to download the Official Dollar Jpeg Files and then print, print, PRINT those dollars nonstop, day and night! Every man, woman, and child would be a multi-billionaire, and economic activity would be red-hot forever!

Why stop at ten giant-screen TVs when you can have twenty? Heck, why not panel every wall in your mansion floor-to-ceiling with big-screen LCDs? You couldn’t get them all home in your new Ferrari, but you could easily buy a fleet of vans for the job – and hire drivers for them, too. You could buy ANYTHING YOU WANTED, every day of the year!

See what I mean? How could the economic crisis withstand that? Problem solved! – at least if we believe the rationale for America ‘s current response to the financial crisis.

For some reason, we aren’t handing the zillions of new dollars we are creating to just anyone. No, Our Leaders know what’s best (despite their constant failure in the past) and they have decided to be picky, and to hand most (although not all) of those galactic-sized piles of your money to failed bankers (only some of whom may be guilty of teensy amounts of mortgage fraud), to failed automakers and other failed big-business honchos, to federal bureaucrats and heads of police-state agencies, and to other more-important-than-you über-humans who will spend the money better than you would. (Our Maximum Leader also knows how to spin this better than I do [or see here], making it sound positively sensible). Like crumbs trickling down from a banquet table to the mice and roaches below, some of this trillion-dollar largess will float down to the Little People, and then Americans can be happy and rich and smug once again, as we have every right to be. America ! Hell yeah!

But somewhere, in a dark and anxious corner of our minds, we know the truth: hard work and savings are needed to create and sustain prosperity. Constantly going into debt to spend more money than you actually have while closing down productive industries and shipping the work overseas – living like parasites on the savings and labor of other nations – is a sure-fire way to turn a prosperous nation into a poor one. Printing mountains of money from thin air doesn’t work either, since each new dollar-from-nothing reduces the value of every existing dollar – exactly why counterfeiting is illegal. For proof, Americans need only look at their own currency, which used to be gold and silver (as the Constitution still requires*), with a fixed rate of roughly $20 per ounce of gold. As this is written, it takes 50 times more dollars to buy an ounce of gold, at $1,000 per ounce. Imagine how much new money was created (and spent or given away by the government – instead of being used by the people for what they might have wanted) to debase the dollar to such an extent, rendering each dollar now almost worthless.

It is worth saying again: Print more dollars, and each dollar loses value. A simple chart shows how this works in the real world:

From Money Supply and Purchasing Power

by Mike Hewitt and Dr. Krassimir Petrov

The chart above uses the government CPI figures for “purchasing power”, and during the time covered in the chart the government has changed the way the CPI is calculated, resulting in lower rates of “official” inflation than the older methods would show (see shadowstats.com for details). In other words, the problem is even worse than the chart suggests.

We did get something for all that debt and counterfeit money – many things, in fact: war after war [pdf], the largest military-industrial complex the world has ever seen, an intrusive and arrogant foreign policy that has made us the most hated nation around the globe, social programs that have displaced voluntarily-funded (i.e., civil) market alternatives while leading Americans into child-like dependency, an expanding police state here at home, a cruel and counterproductive war on drugs, and ominously powerful corporatist nodes like Blackwater and Halliburton and Monsanto (not to mention Big Pharma, the banking industry, and a hundred more). As I said, the power elite know how to spend your money, and in today’s crisis, more than ever, we need to just stand back and let ‘em work!

- 3 –

Throwing Gasoline on the Fire

US TREASURIES ARE DOOMED for the simple reason that the United States thinks it can go on manufacturing money out of nowhere and get stupid foreigners to pay for it all by buying Treasuries . . . . WELCOME TO THE ERA OF HYPERINFLATION. Is it any wonder that gold and silver, the traditional stores of value in times of crisis, are taking off against all currencies? Hot new degree course topics for business students around the world will surely be ‘The Weimar Republics of Germany and the United States , 1920 and 2009′, and ‘ Zimbabwe and the United States –from riches to rags’. So US Treasuries are the ultimate sucker play–zero yield and a bear market to boot–why not save yourself the trouble and walk out into the street and stuff your money straight down the drain?” [ CAPS in original]

– Clive Maund, Precious Metals Stocks Stalemate About to End

Moving gingerly back to reality, we are reminded, with a sense of horror, that even many intelligent and educated people are mired in the Quantum Wrongness Field like mastodons in the La Brea tar pits. Despite example after example of hyperinflation throughout history, Americans somehow think they will be immune. Despite the universally devastating effects of hyperinflation – destruction of the middle class; near-total loss of value for pensions, salaries, and savings; widespread poverty and hunger; enhanced tyranny and (too often) outright war – despite all that, people expect something different this time: unicorns and flowers, perhaps.

But even unicorns wouldn’t be enough to hold back the darker reality of hyperinflation. The PBS series Commanding Heights includes an essay on the German Hyperinflation of 1923, which quotes Pearl Buck on her experience in Germany at the time, where she was visiting (Buck is most famous for her novels on China). Looking back on the experience from later in life, she wrote: “The cities were still there, the houses not yet bombed and in ruins, but the victims were millions of people. They had lost their fortunes, their savings; they were dazed and inflation-shocked and did not understand how it had happened to them and who the foe was who had defeated them. Yet they had lost their self-assurance, their feeling that they themselves could be the masters of their own lives if only they worked hard enough; and lost, too, were the old values of morals, of ethics, of decency.” (See also this list of descriptions of 20th Century hyperinflations at the PBS site).

Morals, ethics, and decency gone, along with every last shred of prosperity: Welcome to your future, America ! It is probably too late to avoid that hyperinflationary future now no matter what we do – economist John Williams of ShadowStats.com thinks so – but adding trillions of dollars in new debt while also printing trillions from thin air will accelerate and deepen the disaster as surely as the dark of night follows sunset. The carefully-misnamed “stimulus” that so many are cheering is the death knell for what remains of this nation’s prosperity and freedom.

Government “help” is exactly what turns a short, sharp correction into a generation-long nightmare; when government stays out of the way in a financial crisis, the problem is resolved quickly, as happened in 1921, 1947, and 1981. This is perfectly in line with a well-known natural law, which states that – as social philosopher and noted economic expert Ringo Starr once put it – “everything government touches turns to crap.” (My own formulation of the law is that “coercive government is The Worst Way to Do Anything.”)

Japan and the United States, among other nations, have previously turned what might have been short downturns into decades-long economic agonies by means of the same type of “government stimulus spending” that Obama and Congress are now forcing on American taxpayers. Obama is only following in the footsteps of Bush, who promoted and signed a $700 billion bailout along with other massive giveaways, just as FDR was following in the interventionist footsteps of Herbert Hoover, despite the common myth that their policies were diametrically opposed. Big-spending “stimulus” and “job creation” efforts not only failed to quickly end the Great Depression; they dragged the problem out for years. Despite the long build-up of demand (from low consumption) during the ‘30s, it wasn’t until after the end of World War II (during which Americans suffered rationing of meat, gasoline, tires, automobiles, shoes, and other necessities) – in the late 1940s – that America returned to anything one might reasonably call prosperity.

In last Sunday’s San Francisco Chronicle, Carolyn Lochhead gives some relevant specifics about how government “stimulus spending” has worked historically: “Japan’s Nikkei stock index peaked around 39,000 in 1989 and two decades later is languishing around 7,500. Japan ‘s real estate market still has not recovered after 17 years. The Dow Jones index did not rebound from the 1929 U.S. stock market crash until 1954.”

Today, U.S. fundamentals are far worse than they were in 1929. Our levels of debt; our diminished and crumbling manufacturing sector; the banking sector meltdown; the size of our military, of our costly overseas empire and of our parasitic government generally; not to mention the approach of both hyperinflation and Peak Oil, among other things – all this is orders of magnitude beyond what we faced as the 1930s began. For such reasons, I believe that real recovery in the U.S. will take far longer than the quarter-century it took to finally shake off the effects of the Great Depression. Most people alive today will not be alive when (or rather, if) America returns to the level of prosperity this generation grew up taking for granted.

And that is what you get when you let government and a monopoly-chartered central bank control your nation’s system of money.

- – - – -

Note:

* Although the United States came into being as exactly that – a voluntary union of sovereign states – and despite Article One, Section 10 stating clearly that “No State shall . . . make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt”, the argument has been made (before the Supreme Court, in fact) that this clause actually means that the States can make anything whatsoever a tender in Payment of Debt, as long as the federal government decides to force that system down their throats. In fact, the Constitution explicitly prohibits the states from recognizing or allowing money other than gold and silver to circulate as legal tender, regardless of who issues it. The founders clearly meant for money in these United States to always be gold and silver (writings from the era amply confirm this), but that’s the glory of our system: with the right crew on the Supreme Court, plain language in the Constitution can mean anything our rulers want it to mean. For a highly detailed look at the topic, consider Eugene C. Holloway’s Gold, Money, and the U.S. Constitution series.

Further Adventures in the Quantum Wrongness Field, Economic Crisis Edition

by Glen Allport

- 1 –

Deeper into the Wrongness

I described the common state of Wrongness in Marooned in the Quantum Wrongness Field (April, 2007). Today, the public is predictably being lured ever-deeper into Wrongness by propaganda about the economic crisis. Among other things, we are told that adding trillions of dollars in new federal debt and printing oceans of new money-from-thin-air will somehow restore prosperity.

Given that such behavior was the primary cause of the crisis, it would seem obvious that more of the same will not solve the problem. Debt doesn’t create prosperity, but heavy debt can certainly vaporize prosperity, and the bailouts have so far added $27,599 in government debt for every U.S. citizen – $110,396 per family of four. (Yes, that’s just new debt). Printing money non-stop doesn’t create prosperity either, as anyone in Zimbabwe can testify (do not miss the video embedded in that link), but the human ability to passionately believe in Things That Are Wrong is apparently stronger than reality itself.

For a time, anyway.

- 2 –

Why is Counterfeiting Illegal?

If printing up trillions of dollars to “stimulate spending” is going to save the economy, why do we ever put up with even the slightest recession? Just print that funky money, boys and girls! Give every citizen a high-speed color laser printer and require everyone to download the Official Dollar Jpeg Files and then print, print, PRINT those dollars nonstop, day and night! Every man, woman, and child would be a multi-billionaire, and economic activity would be red-hot forever!

Why stop at ten giant-screen TVs when you can have twenty? Heck, why not panel every wall in your mansion floor-to-ceiling with big-screen LCDs? You couldn’t get them all home in your new Ferrari, but you could easily buy a fleet of vans for the job – and hire drivers for them, too. You could buy ANYTHING YOU WANTED, every day of the year!

See what I mean? How could the economic crisis withstand that? Problem solved! – at least if we believe the rationale for America ‘s current response to the financial crisis.

For some reason, we aren’t handing the zillions of new dollars we are creating to just anyone. No, Our Leaders know what’s best (despite their constant failure in the past) and they have decided to be picky, and to hand most (although not all) of those galactic-sized piles of your money to failed bankers (only some of whom may be guilty of teensy amounts of mortgage fraud), to failed automakers and other failed big-business honchos, to federal bureaucrats and heads of police-state agencies, and to other more-important-than-you über-humans who will spend the money better than you would. (Our Maximum Leader also knows how to spin this better than I do [or see here], making it sound positively sensible). Like crumbs trickling down from a banquet table to the mice and roaches below, some of this trillion-dollar largess will float down to the Little People, and then Americans can be happy and rich and smug once again, as we have every right to be. America ! Hell yeah!

But somewhere, in a dark and anxious corner of our minds, we know the truth: hard work and savings are needed to create and sustain prosperity. Constantly going into debt to spend more money than you actually have while closing down productive industries and shipping the work overseas – living like parasites on the savings and labor of other nations – is a sure-fire way to turn a prosperous nation into a poor one. Printing mountains of money from thin air doesn’t work either, since each new dollar-from-nothing reduces the value of every existing dollar – exactly why counterfeiting is illegal. For proof, Americans need only look at their own currency, which used to be gold and silver (as the Constitution still requires*), with a fixed rate of roughly $20 per ounce of gold. As this is written, it takes 50 times more dollars to buy an ounce of gold, at $1,000 per ounce. Imagine how much new money was created (and spent or given away by the government – instead of being used by the people for what they might have wanted) to debase the dollar to such an extent, rendering each dollar now almost worthless.

It is worth saying again: Print more dollars, and each dollar loses value. A simple chart shows how this works in the real world:

From Money Supply and Purchasing Power

by Mike Hewitt and Dr. Krassimir Petrov

The chart above uses the government CPI figures for “purchasing power”, and during the time covered in the chart the government has changed the way the CPI is calculated, resulting in lower rates of “official” inflation than the older methods would show (see shadowstats.com for details). In other words, the problem is even worse than the chart suggests.

We did get something for all that debt and counterfeit money – many things, in fact: war after war [pdf], the largest military-industrial complex the world has ever seen, an intrusive and arrogant foreign policy that has made us the most hated nation around the globe, social programs that have displaced voluntarily-funded (i.e., civil) market alternatives while leading Americans into child-like dependency, an expanding police state here at home, a cruel and counterproductive war on drugs, and ominously powerful corporatist nodes like Blackwater and Halliburton and Monsanto (not to mention Big Pharma, the banking industry, and a hundred more). As I said, the power elite know how to spend your money, and in today’s crisis, more than ever, we need to just stand back and let ‘em work!

- 3 –

Throwing Gasoline on the Fire

US TREASURIES ARE DOOMED for the simple reason that the United States thinks it can go on manufacturing money out of nowhere and get stupid foreigners to pay for it all by buying Treasuries . . . . WELCOME TO THE ERA OF HYPERINFLATION. Is it any wonder that gold and silver, the traditional stores of value in times of crisis, are taking off against all currencies? Hot new degree course topics for business students around the world will surely be ‘The Weimar Republics of Germany and the United States , 1920 and 2009′, and ‘ Zimbabwe and the United States –from riches to rags’. So US Treasuries are the ultimate sucker play–zero yield and a bear market to boot–why not save yourself the trouble and walk out into the street and stuff your money straight down the drain?” [ CAPS in original]

– Clive Maund, Precious Metals Stocks Stalemate About to End

Moving gingerly back to reality, we are reminded, with a sense of horror, that even many intelligent and educated people are mired in the Quantum Wrongness Field like mastodons in the La Brea tar pits. Despite example after example of hyperinflation throughout history, Americans somehow think they will be immune. Despite the universally devastating effects of hyperinflation – destruction of the middle class; near-total loss of value for pensions, salaries, and savings; widespread poverty and hunger; enhanced tyranny and (too often) outright war – despite all that, people expect something different this time: unicorns and flowers, perhaps.

But even unicorns wouldn’t be enough to hold back the darker reality of hyperinflation. The PBS series Commanding Heights includes an essay on the German Hyperinflation of 1923, which quotes Pearl Buck on her experience in Germany at the time, where she was visiting (Buck is most famous for her novels on China). Looking back on the experience from later in life, she wrote: “The cities were still there, the houses not yet bombed and in ruins, but the victims were millions of people. They had lost their fortunes, their savings; they were dazed and inflation-shocked and did not understand how it had happened to them and who the foe was who had defeated them. Yet they had lost their self-assurance, their feeling that they themselves could be the masters of their own lives if only they worked hard enough; and lost, too, were the old values of morals, of ethics, of decency.” (See also this list of descriptions of 20th Century hyperinflations at the PBS site).

Morals, ethics, and decency gone, along with every last shred of prosperity: Welcome to your future, America ! It is probably too late to avoid that hyperinflationary future now no matter what we do – economist John Williams of ShadowStats.com thinks so – but adding trillions of dollars in new debt while also printing trillions from thin air will accelerate and deepen the disaster as surely as the dark of night follows sunset. The carefully-misnamed “stimulus” that so many are cheering is the death knell for what remains of this nation’s prosperity and freedom.

Government “help” is exactly what turns a short, sharp correction into a generation-long nightmare; when government stays out of the way in a financial crisis, the problem is resolved quickly, as happened in 1921, 1947, and 1981. This is perfectly in line with a well-known natural law, which states that – as social philosopher and noted economic expert Ringo Starr once put it – “everything government touches turns to crap.” (My own formulation of the law is that “coercive government is The Worst Way to Do Anything.”)

Japan and the United States, among other nations, have previously turned what might have been short downturns into decades-long economic agonies by means of the same type of “government stimulus spending” that Obama and Congress are now forcing on American taxpayers. Obama is only following in the footsteps of Bush, who promoted and signed a $700 billion bailout along with other massive giveaways, just as FDR was following in the interventionist footsteps of Herbert Hoover, despite the common myth that their policies were diametrically opposed. Big-spending “stimulus” and “job creation” efforts not only failed to quickly end the Great Depression; they dragged the problem out for years. Despite the long build-up of demand (from low consumption) during the ‘30s, it wasn’t until after the end of World War II (during which Americans suffered rationing of meat, gasoline, tires, automobiles, shoes, and other necessities) – in the late 1940s – that America returned to anything one might reasonably call prosperity.

In last Sunday’s San Francisco Chronicle, Carolyn Lochhead gives some relevant specifics about how government “stimulus spending” has worked historically: “Japan’s Nikkei stock index peaked around 39,000 in 1989 and two decades later is languishing around 7,500. Japan ‘s real estate market still has not recovered after 17 years. The Dow Jones index did not rebound from the 1929 U.S. stock market crash until 1954.”

Today, U.S. fundamentals are far worse than they were in 1929. Our levels of debt; our diminished and crumbling manufacturing sector; the banking sector meltdown; the size of our military, of our costly overseas empire and of our parasitic government generally; not to mention the approach of both hyperinflation and Peak Oil, among other things – all this is orders of magnitude beyond what we faced as the 1930s began. For such reasons, I believe that real recovery in the U.S. will take far longer than the quarter-century it took to finally shake off the effects of the Great Depression. Most people alive today will not be alive when (or rather, if) America returns to the level of prosperity this generation grew up taking for granted.

And that is what you get when you let government and a monopoly-chartered central bank control your nation’s system of money.

- – - – -

Note:

* Although the United States came into being as exactly that – a voluntary union of sovereign states – and despite Article One, Section 10 stating clearly that “No State shall . . . make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt”, the argument has been made (before the Supreme Court, in fact) that this clause actually means that the States can make anything whatsoever a tender in Payment of Debt, as long as the federal government decides to force that system down their throats. In fact, the Constitution explicitly prohibits the states from recognizing or allowing money other than gold and silver to circulate as legal tender, regardless of who issues it. The founders clearly meant for money in these United States to always be gold and silver (writings from the era amply confirm this), but that’s the glory of our system: with the right crew on the Supreme Court, plain language in the Constitution can mean anything our rulers want it to mean. For a highly detailed look at the topic, consider Eugene C. Holloway’s Gold, Money, and the U.S. Constitution series.

Key Facts

  • Total direct aid to Israel, 1948-2003
    $89.9 billion (uncorrected for inflation)
  • Since 1976 Israel has been the largest annual recipient of US aid. It is the largest cumulative recipient since World War II.
  • Direct U.S. aid for each Israeli citizen in 2001 (per capita annual income of Israel = $16,710) — over $500
  • Direct U.S. Aid for each Ethiopian citizen in 2001 (per capita annual income of Ethiopia = $100) — about $.45
  • REGULAR US GRANT AID in FY 2003
    $2.76 billion military aid grant
    $2.1 billion economic support funds
    $600 million refugee resettlement grant
  • COMMERCIAL LOAN GUARANTEES IN FY 2003
    $2 billion
  • BUSH ADMINISTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR FY 2003
    Military aid grant $1 billion
    Commercial loan guarantees $9 billion
    Arrow missile development $60 million
  • TOTAL AID FOR FY 2003 $14.82 billion
  • Percentage of U.S. foreign aid that goes to Israel — 30%
  • Israel’s population as a percentage of world population — .01%
  • Section 116 of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) states, “No assistance may be provided under this part to the government of any country which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.” 22 U.S.C. 2304(a)
  • Section 4 of the Arms Export Control Act prohibits selling military equipment to countries that use them for non-self-defense purposes.
  • The U.S. State Department determined in February 2001 that Israel has committed each of the acts that the law defines as “gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, including torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention without charges and trial, causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, and other flagrant denials of the right to life, liberty, or the security of person.” It described Israeli army use of live ammunition against Palestinians when soldiers were not in impending danger as “excessive use of force.”

SOURCES: Clyde R. Mark, ?Israel: U.S. Foreign Assistance, Congressional Research Service, updated April 1, 2003; Clyde R. Mark, Middle East: U.S. Foreign Assistance, FY 2001, FY 2002, FY 2003 Congressional Research Service, March 28, 2002

Key Facts

  • Total direct aid to Israel, 1948-2003
    $89.9 billion (uncorrected for inflation)
  • Since 1976 Israel has been the largest annual recipient of US aid. It is the largest cumulative recipient since World War II.
  • Direct U.S. aid for each Israeli citizen in 2001 (per capita annual income of Israel = $16,710) — over $500
  • Direct U.S. Aid for each Ethiopian citizen in 2001 (per capita annual income of Ethiopia = $100) — about $.45
  • REGULAR US GRANT AID in FY 2003
    $2.76 billion military aid grant
    $2.1 billion economic support funds
    $600 million refugee resettlement grant
  • COMMERCIAL LOAN GUARANTEES IN FY 2003
    $2 billion
  • BUSH ADMINISTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR FY 2003
    Military aid grant $1 billion
    Commercial loan guarantees $9 billion
    Arrow missile development $60 million
  • TOTAL AID FOR FY 2003 $14.82 billion
  • Percentage of U.S. foreign aid that goes to Israel — 30%
  • Israel’s population as a percentage of world population — .01%
  • Section 116 of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) states, “No assistance may be provided under this part to the government of any country which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.” 22 U.S.C. 2304(a)
  • Section 4 of the Arms Export Control Act prohibits selling military equipment to countries that use them for non-self-defense purposes.
  • The U.S. State Department determined in February 2001 that Israel has committed each of the acts that the law defines as “gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, including torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention without charges and trial, causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, and other flagrant denials of the right to life, liberty, or the security of person.” It described Israeli army use of live ammunition against Palestinians when soldiers were not in impending danger as “excessive use of force.”

SOURCES: Clyde R. Mark, ?Israel: U.S. Foreign Assistance, Congressional Research Service, updated April 1, 2003; Clyde R. Mark, Middle East: U.S. Foreign Assistance, FY 2001, FY 2002, FY 2003 Congressional Research Service, March 28, 2002

The President of Special Interests

By Paul Craig Roberts

February 17, 2009 “
Information Clearinghouse The Bush/Obama bailout/stimulus plans are not going to work. Both are schemes hatched by a clique of financial insiders. The schemes will redistribute income and wealth from American taxpayers to the shyster banksters, who have destroyed American jobs, ruined the retirement plans of tens of millions of Americans, and worsened the situation of millions of people worldwide who naively trusted American financial institutions. The ongoing theft has simply been recast. Instead of using fraudulent financial instruments, the banksters are using government policy.

Michael Hudson captures the nature of the heist in CounterPunch (February 12):

“When it comes to cleaning up the Greenspan Bubble legacy by writing down homeowner mortgage debt, the Treasury proposal offers homeowners $50 billion – just [half of one percent] of the $10 trillion Wall Street bailout to date, and less than half the amount given to AIG to pay its hedge fund speculators on their derivative gambles. The Treasury has handed out $25 billion to each and every big bank, so just two of these banks alone got as much as the reported one-quarter of all homeowners in America suffering from Negative Equity on their homes and in need of mortgage renegotiation. Yet today’s economic shrinkage cannot be reversed without a recovery in consumer demand. The economy has lost the “virtual wealth” in higher-priced homes and the stock market, and must rely on after-tax earnings. But I see little concern for wage earners in the Treasury plan. Without debt relief, consumer spending and business investment will not recover.”

The big money men cannot conceive of anyone’s suffering except the mega-rich. If billions are not at stake, what is the problem? How can a family losing its house bring down the economy?

There was a time in America when the interests of elites were connected to those of ordinary Americans. Henry Ford said that he paid his workers good wages so they could buy his cars.

Today American corporations pay foreign workers low wages so CEOs can pay themselves multi-million dollar “performance” bonuses.

Congress has had a parade of CEOs, ranging from Bill Gates of MIcrosoft and IBM brass on down the line, to testify that they desperately need more H-1B work visas for foreign employees as they cannot find enough American software engineers and IT workers to grow their businesses. Yet, all the companies who sing this song have established records of replacing American employees with H-1B workers who are paid less.

Just the other day Microsoft, IBM, Texas Instruments, Sprint Nextel, Intel, Motorola, and scores of other corporations announced thousands of layoffs of the qualified American engineers who “are in short supply.”

IBM has offered to help to relocate its “redundant” but “scarce” American engineers to its operations in India, China, Brazil, Mexico, the Czech Republic, Russia, South Africa, Nigeria, and the United Arab Emirates at the salaries prevailing in those countries.. http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=213000389

On January 28, USA Today reported: “In 2007, the last full year for which detailed employment numbers are available, 121,000 of IBM’s 387,000 workers [31%] were in the U.S. Meanwhile, staffing in India has jumped from just 9,000 workers in 2003 to 74,000 workers in 2007.”

In order to penetrate and to serve foreign markets, US corporations need overseas operations. There is nothing unusual or unpatriotic about this. However, many US companies use foreign labor to manufacture abroad the products that they sell in American markets. If Henry Ford had used Indian, Chinese, or Mexican workers to manufacture his cars, Indians, Chinese and Mexicans could possibly have purchased Fords, but not Americans.

Senators Charles Grassley and Bernie Sanders offered an amendment to the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bill that would prevent companies receiving bailout money from discharging American employees and replacing them with foreigners on H-1B visas.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, no longer an American institution, and immigration advocates, such as the American Immigration Lawyers Association,
immediately went to work to defeat or to water down the amendments. Senator Grassley’s attempt to prevent American corporations from replacing American workers with foreigners on H-1B work visas in the midst of the most serious economic crisis since the Great Depression was met with outrage from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, an organization concerned solely with the multi-million dollar bonuses paid to American CEOs for reducing labor costs by offshoring American jobs or by replacing American employees with foreign guest workers.

On January 23 Senator Grassley wrote to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer:

“I am concerned that Microsoft will be retaining foreign guest workers rather than similarly qualified American employees when it implements its layoff plan. As you know, I want to make sure employers recruit qualified American workers first before hiring foreign guest workers. For example, I cosponsored legislation to overhaul the H-1B and L-1 visa programs to give priority to American workers and to crack down on unscrupulous employers who deprive qualified Americans of high-skilled jobs. Fraud and abuse is rampant in these programs, and we need more transparency to protect the integrity of our immigration system.

“Last year, Microsoft was here on Capitol Hill advocating for more H-1B visas. The purpose of the H-1B visa program is to assist companies in their employment needs where there is not a sufficient American workforce to meet their technology expertise requirements. However, H-1B and other work visa programs were never intended to replace qualified American workers. Certainly, these work visa programs were never intended to allow a company to retain foreign guest workers rather than similarly qualified American workers, when that company cuts jobs during an economic downturn.

“It is imperative that in implementing its layoff plan, Microsoft ensures that American workers have priority in keeping their jobs over foreign workers on visa programs.

“My point is that during a layoff, companies should not be retaining H-1B or other work visa program employees over qualified American workers. Our immigration policy is not intended to harm the American workforce. I encourage Microsoft to ensure that Americans are given priority in job retention. Microsoft has a moral obligation to protect these American workers by putting them first during these difficult economic times.”

Senator Grassley is rightly concerned that recession layoffs will shield increased jobs offshoring and use of H-1B workers. On February 13, Pravda reported that “America has begun the initial steps to final outsourcing of it’s last dominant industry”–oil/gas and oil/gas services. Pravda reports that “as with other formerly dominant industries, such as light manufacturing, IT, textiles,” recession is “used as the knife to finally do in the workers.”

According to Pravda, “IT is a prime example. The companies used the bust to lay off hundreds of thousands of tech workers around the US and Britain, citing low profits or debt. The public as a whole accepted this, as part of the economic landscape and protests were few, especially with a prospect of the situation turning around. However, shortly after the turn around in the economy, it became very clear that there would be no turn around in the IT employment industry. Not only were companies outsourcing everything they could, under the cover of the recession, they had shipped in tens of thousands of H-1B work visaed workers who were paid on the cheap.” http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/107104-america_dominant_industry-0

It is rare to find US Representatives and Senators, such as Grassley, who will take a stand against powerful special interests. Some do so inadvertently, forgetting that patriotism is no longer a characteristic of the American business elite. Hoping to stimulate American rather than foreign businesses, the House version of the economic stimulus bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, required that funds provided by the bill cannot be used to purchase foreign-made iron, steel, and textiles.

The Senate provision was more sweeping, mandating that all manufactured goods purchased with stimulus money be American-made.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, Caterpillar, General Electric, other transnational corporations, and editorial writers whose newspapers are dependent on corporate advertising set out to defeat the buy American requirement. As far as these anti-American organizations are concerned, the stimulus bill has nothing to do with American jobs or the American economy. It only has to do with the special interest appetites that have the political power to rip off the American taxpayers. [see Manufacturing & Technology News, February 4, 2009]

Senator John McCain is their man. “Protectionism” exclaimed the man the Republicans wanted as president. McCain said the buy American provision would cause a second Great Depression. U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue said that buying abroad was “economic patriotism.”

The American economic elite are hiding their treason to the American people behind “free trade.”

I want to say this as clearly as it can be said. The offshoring of American jobs is the anthesis of free trade. Free trade is based on comparative advantage. Jobs offshoring is an activity in pursuit of lowest factor cost–an activity that David Ricardo, the originator of the free trade theory, described as the betrayal of one’s own country in pursuit of “absolute advantage.”

The “free market” shills on the payroll of the U.S. Chamber, NAM, and in economics departments and think tanks that are recipients of grants from transnational corporations are whores aligned with elites who are destroying the American work force.

Obama has appointed to his National Economic Council blatant apologists for the offshoring of American jobs.

Possibly Obama loves the country that elevated him to its highest office. But his administration is populated with people whose loyalty does not extend beyond elites to the American people.

The President of Special Interests

By Paul Craig Roberts

February 17, 2009 “
Information Clearinghouse The Bush/Obama bailout/stimulus plans are not going to work. Both are schemes hatched by a clique of financial insiders. The schemes will redistribute income and wealth from American taxpayers to the shyster banksters, who have destroyed American jobs, ruined the retirement plans of tens of millions of Americans, and worsened the situation of millions of people worldwide who naively trusted American financial institutions. The ongoing theft has simply been recast. Instead of using fraudulent financial instruments, the banksters are using government policy.

Michael Hudson captures the nature of the heist in CounterPunch (February 12):

“When it comes to cleaning up the Greenspan Bubble legacy by writing down homeowner mortgage debt, the Treasury proposal offers homeowners $50 billion – just [half of one percent] of the $10 trillion Wall Street bailout to date, and less than half the amount given to AIG to pay its hedge fund speculators on their derivative gambles. The Treasury has handed out $25 billion to each and every big bank, so just two of these banks alone got as much as the reported one-quarter of all homeowners in America suffering from Negative Equity on their homes and in need of mortgage renegotiation. Yet today’s economic shrinkage cannot be reversed without a recovery in consumer demand. The economy has lost the “virtual wealth” in higher-priced homes and the stock market, and must rely on after-tax earnings. But I see little concern for wage earners in the Treasury plan. Without debt relief, consumer spending and business investment will not recover.”

The big money men cannot conceive of anyone’s suffering except the mega-rich. If billions are not at stake, what is the problem? How can a family losing its house bring down the economy?

There was a time in America when the interests of elites were connected to those of ordinary Americans. Henry Ford said that he paid his workers good wages so they could buy his cars.

Today American corporations pay foreign workers low wages so CEOs can pay themselves multi-million dollar “performance” bonuses.

Congress has had a parade of CEOs, ranging from Bill Gates of MIcrosoft and IBM brass on down the line, to testify that they desperately need more H-1B work visas for foreign employees as they cannot find enough American software engineers and IT workers to grow their businesses. Yet, all the companies who sing this song have established records of replacing American employees with H-1B workers who are paid less.

Just the other day Microsoft, IBM, Texas Instruments, Sprint Nextel, Intel, Motorola, and scores of other corporations announced thousands of layoffs of the qualified American engineers who “are in short supply.”

IBM has offered to help to relocate its “redundant” but “scarce” American engineers to its operations in India, China, Brazil, Mexico, the Czech Republic, Russia, South Africa, Nigeria, and the United Arab Emirates at the salaries prevailing in those countries.. http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=213000389

On January 28, USA Today reported: “In 2007, the last full year for which detailed employment numbers are available, 121,000 of IBM’s 387,000 workers [31%] were in the U.S. Meanwhile, staffing in India has jumped from just 9,000 workers in 2003 to 74,000 workers in 2007.”

In order to penetrate and to serve foreign markets, US corporations need overseas operations. There is nothing unusual or unpatriotic about this. However, many US companies use foreign labor to manufacture abroad the products that they sell in American markets. If Henry Ford had used Indian, Chinese, or Mexican workers to manufacture his cars, Indians, Chinese and Mexicans could possibly have purchased Fords, but not Americans.

Senators Charles Grassley and Bernie Sanders offered an amendment to the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bill that would prevent companies receiving bailout money from discharging American employees and replacing them with foreigners on H-1B visas.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, no longer an American institution, and immigration advocates, such as the American Immigration Lawyers Association,
immediately went to work to defeat or to water down the amendments. Senator Grassley’s attempt to prevent American corporations from replacing American workers with foreigners on H-1B work visas in the midst of the most serious economic crisis since the Great Depression was met with outrage from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, an organization concerned solely with the multi-million dollar bonuses paid to American CEOs for reducing labor costs by offshoring American jobs or by replacing American employees with foreign guest workers.

On January 23 Senator Grassley wrote to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer:

“I am concerned that Microsoft will be retaining foreign guest workers rather than similarly qualified American employees when it implements its layoff plan. As you know, I want to make sure employers recruit qualified American workers first before hiring foreign guest workers. For example, I cosponsored legislation to overhaul the H-1B and L-1 visa programs to give priority to American workers and to crack down on unscrupulous employers who deprive qualified Americans of high-skilled jobs. Fraud and abuse is rampant in these programs, and we need more transparency to protect the integrity of our immigration system.

“Last year, Microsoft was here on Capitol Hill advocating for more H-1B visas. The purpose of the H-1B visa program is to assist companies in their employment needs where there is not a sufficient American workforce to meet their technology expertise requirements. However, H-1B and other work visa programs were never intended to replace qualified American workers. Certainly, these work visa programs were never intended to allow a company to retain foreign guest workers rather than similarly qualified American workers, when that company cuts jobs during an economic downturn.

“It is imperative that in implementing its layoff plan, Microsoft ensures that American workers have priority in keeping their jobs over foreign workers on visa programs.

“My point is that during a layoff, companies should not be retaining H-1B or other work visa program employees over qualified American workers. Our immigration policy is not intended to harm the American workforce. I encourage Microsoft to ensure that Americans are given priority in job retention. Microsoft has a moral obligation to protect these American workers by putting them first during these difficult economic times.”

Senator Grassley is rightly concerned that recession layoffs will shield increased jobs offshoring and use of H-1B workers. On February 13, Pravda reported that “America has begun the initial steps to final outsourcing of it’s last dominant industry”–oil/gas and oil/gas services. Pravda reports that “as with other formerly dominant industries, such as light manufacturing, IT, textiles,” recession is “used as the knife to finally do in the workers.”

According to Pravda, “IT is a prime example. The companies used the bust to lay off hundreds of thousands of tech workers around the US and Britain, citing low profits or debt. The public as a whole accepted this, as part of the economic landscape and protests were few, especially with a prospect of the situation turning around. However, shortly after the turn around in the economy, it became very clear that there would be no turn around in the IT employment industry. Not only were companies outsourcing everything they could, under the cover of the recession, they had shipped in tens of thousands of H-1B work visaed workers who were paid on the cheap.” http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/107104-america_dominant_industry-0

It is rare to find US Representatives and Senators, such as Grassley, who will take a stand against powerful special interests. Some do so inadvertently, forgetting that patriotism is no longer a characteristic of the American business elite. Hoping to stimulate American rather than foreign businesses, the House version of the economic stimulus bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, required that funds provided by the bill cannot be used to purchase foreign-made iron, steel, and textiles.

The Senate provision was more sweeping, mandating that all manufactured goods purchased with stimulus money be American-made.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, Caterpillar, General Electric, other transnational corporations, and editorial writers whose newspapers are dependent on corporate advertising set out to defeat the buy American requirement. As far as these anti-American organizations are concerned, the stimulus bill has nothing to do with American jobs or the American economy. It only has to do with the special interest appetites that have the political power to rip off the American taxpayers. [see Manufacturing & Technology News, February 4, 2009]

Senator John McCain is their man. “Protectionism” exclaimed the man the Republicans wanted as president. McCain said the buy American provision would cause a second Great Depression. U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue said that buying abroad was “economic patriotism.”

The American economic elite are hiding their treason to the American people behind “free trade.”

I want to say this as clearly as it can be said. The offshoring of American jobs is the anthesis of free trade. Free trade is based on comparative advantage. Jobs offshoring is an activity in pursuit of lowest factor cost–an activity that David Ricardo, the originator of the free trade theory, described as the betrayal of one’s own country in pursuit of “absolute advantage.”

The “free market” shills on the payroll of the U.S. Chamber, NAM, and in economics departments and think tanks that are recipients of grants from transnational corporations are whores aligned with elites who are destroying the American work force.

Obama has appointed to his National Economic Council blatant apologists for the offshoring of American jobs.

Possibly Obama loves the country that elevated him to its highest office. But his administration is populated with people whose loyalty does not extend beyond elites to the American people.